Opinion ID: 2339470
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: issues

Text: Defendants' petition for review set out two issues. First, they challenged the Court of Appeals' decision that Tipton's and Biltoft's knowledge of Stapleton's housing in the Close Observation unit was sufficient in and of itself to create a genuine issue of material fact on whether they knew or should have known there was a risk of Stapleton's suicide. This issue goes to whether any duty defendants owed to Stapleton was triggered or breached. Defendants' second challenge to the Court of Appeals' decision focused on the KTCA's discretionary function exception, which they believe applies to give them immunity from suit. We perceive the need to address another legal issue first. Although defendants have expressly conceded that they owed a duty to Stapleton, they have not identified its source or described its nature. We believe that a full understanding of the duty is necessary to enable us to decide whether there is evidence that it was triggered or breached and whether KTCA immunity is available. We therefore begin our analysis by examining the duty Kansas jailers owe to the jailed.