Whaley v. Sharp
301 Kan. 192
| Kan. | 2014Background
- KTCA requires prior written notice to municipalities before claims are pursued; issue is whether this notice is required for suits only against municipal employees.
- Whaley filed notice to Ashland Health Center alleging employee negligence and hospital liability; later sued Sharp and Bigler without naming Ashland.
- Suits against Sharp/Bigler were filed within 2-year limitations; hospital not named as a defendant.
- District court granted summary judgment, relying on King v. Pimentel to require notice before filing against employees.
- Court of Appeals panel affirmed; chief dissent argued no notice required against employees; Supreme Court granted review to decide the statutory issue.
- Court holds notice is not required for suits against municipal employees and remands for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 12-105b(d) applies to claims against municipal employees | Plain language limits to claims against the municipality | Broad interpretation includes suits against employees in scope of employment | No, applies only to municipalities |
| Interpretation of ‘no action’ and jurisdictional bar | No action includes claims against employees identified in the notice | No action only against municipalities; broad interpretation unnecessary | Unambiguous: applies to municipalities only |
| Effect of Bradford/King on current case | Bradford controlling; no notice against employees. | King permissible broader interpretation | Overruled King; statute unambiguous; limits to municipalities |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradford v. Mahon, 219 Kan. 450 (Kan. 1976) (notice requirement before suing a police officer (pre-KTCA) rejected as applied to municipalities)
- King v. Pimentel, 20 Kan. App. 2d 579 (Kan. App. 1995) (notice tolling extended to actions against employees; later overruled by this case)
- Sleeth v. Sedan City Hospital, 298 Kan. 853 (Kan. 2014) (notice prerequisite; 120-day review before suit; subject-matter jurisdiction focused on municipality)
- Dodge City Implement, Inc. v. Board of Barber County Comm’rs, 288 Kan. 619 (Kan. 2009) (notice prerequisite to jurisdiction over municipality)
- Continental Western Ins. Co. v. Shultz, 297 Kan. 769 (Kan. 2013) (context on KTCA; health care provider framework)