Opinion ID: 2571760
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Common-Enemy Doctrine

Text: The Williamsons argue that under the common-law common-enemy doctrine, the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Western and the City. The standard of review regarding summary judgment is as follows: The standard of review for a motion for summary judgment is well established. Summary judgment is appropriate when the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. K.S.A. 60-256(c). On appeal, we apply the same rules, and where we find reasonable minds could differ as to the conclusions drawn from the evidence, summary judgment must be denied. [Citation omitted.] Jackson v. U.S.D. 259, 268 Kan. 319, 322, 995 P.2d 844 (2000). Mere allegations are not sufficient to defend against a properly supported motion for summary judgment: When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this section, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of the adverse party's pleading but the adverse party's response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this section, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. K.S.A. 2002 Supp. 60-256(e). See Mark Twain Kansas City Bank v. Kroh Bros. Dev. Co., 250 Kan. 754, 762, 863 P.2d 355 (1992) (To defeat a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the nonmovant must come forward with `specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.' [Citation omitted.]). Where there is an absence of evidence necessary to support an essential element of the plaintiff's claim, defendants are entitled to summary judgment. Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau, 274 Kan. 263, 278, 50 P.3d 495 (2002). The Williamsons' action against the defendants is based upon trespass and negligence. While the common-law common-enemy doctrine has some application in determining whether summary judgment was appropriate, the ultimate question in this case is whether the judgment may be affirmed as a matter of law.