Opinion ID: 2620371
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Accrual of Trespass by Subsidence

Text: K.S.A. 60-513(b) provides that a trespass by subsidence claim accrues when the “act giving rise to the cause of action first causes substantial injury, or if the fact of injury is not reasonably ascertainable until some time after the initial act, then the period of -10- limitation shall not commence until the fact of injury becomes reasonably ascertainable to the injured party.” Once the claim has accrued, an action must be brought within two years. Id. at 60-513(a)(1). Kansas cases interpreting and applying the accrual statute explain that an action accrues when “the plaintiff could first have filed . . . his action.” Kan. Pub. Emps. Ret. Sys. v. Reimer & Koger Assocs., Inc., 936 P.2d 714, 719 (Kan. 1997). “[W]hen the facts of injury were reasonably ascertainable is an essential element in determining when a tort action accrued.” Gilger v. Lee Const., Inc., 820 P.2d 390, 401 (Kan. 1991). Because trespass by subsidence does not occur until the defendant has allowed the surface to fall and the surface has subsided, see Nida, 855 P.2d at 86-87, the action accrues when the subsidence is reasonably ascertainable. Although K.S.A. 60-513(b) refers to “substantial injury,” Kansas courts have held that an injury is substantial when it is actionable. Roe v. Diefendorf, 689 P.2d 855, 859-60 (Kan. 1984). Applying K.S.A. 60-513(b), Nida, and Diefendorf to this case, the question is whether there is any factual dispute as to accrual that would allow the Kowalskys to survive summary judgment. The answer depends on when subsidence was reasonably ascertainable.