Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau
Decision Date | 12 July 2002 |
Docket Number | No. 87,848.,87,848. |
Parties | GARY L. HALL, Appellant, v. THE KANSAS FARM BUREAU and KANSAS FARM BUREAU SERVICES, INC., Appellees. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
John J. Miller, of Law Office of John J. Miller, P.C., of Kansas City, Missouri, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellant.
Edward L. Bailey, of Cosgrove, Webb & Oman, of Topeka, argued the cause, and Carol B. Bonebrake, of the same firm, was with him on the brief for appellees.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gary Hall appeals from the decision of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Kansas Farm Bureau (Farm Bureau), a cooperative marketing association, and Kansas Farm Bureau Services, Inc. (Farm Bureau Services), a general corporation. Hall was removed as president of both Farm Bureau and Farm Bureau Services. He sued, alleging that his termination violated the Kansas Cooperative Marketing Act (KCMA), constituted retaliatory discharge, and breached an implied contract. He also alleged defamation resulting from statements made by defendant's general counsel and that Farm Bureau Services negligently failed to instruct him in acceptable conduct for his employment.
In its order granting summary judgment in favor of Farm Bureau and Farm Bureau Services, the district court made findings of fact. On appeal, Hall has not challenged the district court's findings. Determinations of fact which are not appealed from are final and conclusive. Klose v. Wood Valley Racquet Club, Inc., 267 Kan. 164, 165, 975 P.2d 1218 (1999).
The district court made the following findings of fact:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kloster v. Hancock (In re Rockhill Pain Specialists, P.A.)
...words, communicated to a third person, which result in harm to the reputation of the person defamed." Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau , 274 Kan. 263, 276, 50 P.3d 495 (2002). "[D]amage to one's reputation is the essence and gravamen of an action for defamation." Gobin v. Globe Publishing Co. , 2......
-
Snyder v. American Kennel Club
...words, communicated to a third person, which result in harm to the reputation of the person defamed." Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau, 274 Kan. 263, 276, 50 P.3d 495 (2002). Because the court has found that a qualified privilege applies to the AKC's publication of the notice, the plaintiffs have......
-
Gannon v. State
...is de novo, we can apply the proper test to the findings ourselves and form our own conclusions. It cites Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau , 274 Kan. 263, 273, 50 P.3d 495 (2002), to declare, "[A]n appellate court may affirm a lower court judgment that relied on the wrong legal standard if factua......
-
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. v. Kan. Dep't of Transp.
...(unpublished) (listing the elements of defamation under Kansas law to include "false ... words" (quoting Hall v. Kan. Farm Bureau, 274 Kan. 263, 50 P.3d 495, 504 (2002) )). Here, KDOT performed tests on Martin Marietta's two quarries, and it determined that the quarries' aggregate failed th......
-
Related State Torts
...to a third person; and (4) the plaintiff’s reputation suffered injury as a result of the statement.”); Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau , 50 P.3d 495, 504 (Kan. 2002) (“The elements of defamation include false and defamatory words, communicated to a third person, which result in harm to the reput......