Corvias Military Living, LLC, and Corvias Military Construction, LLC, Appellants,
Ventamatic, Ltd., and Jakel, Inc., Appellees.
Kansas Product Liability Act, K.S.A. 60-3301 et
seq., governs all product liability actions,
consolidating them into one basis for liability regardless of
economic loss doctrine-which is judicially created-bars a
purchaser of an allegedly defective product from recovering
from a manufacturer under a tort theory for damages that are
Originally, the economic loss doctrine only applied to
prevent recovery for damages to the product itself. Over the
years, the application of the economic loss doctrine has been
expanded to other circumstances.
Kansas courts have adopted the integrated systems approach.
If a component part or component product is considered to be
part of the integrated system, the damage to that property is
considered to be damage to the product itself.
determining whether a component part and the damaged property
are an integrated system, courts must determine whether the
component part is integral to the functioning of or
indistinguishable from the damaged property.
from Geary District Court; Benjamin J. Sexton, judge.
Reversed and remanded.
Charles L. Philbrick, of Rathje & Woodward, LLC, of
Wheaton, Illinois, and William J. Bahr, of Arthur-Green, LLP,
of Manhattan, for appellants.
P. Nordstrom and Seth A. Lowry, of Fisher, Patterson, Sayler
& Smith, L.L.P., of Topeka, for appellee Ventamatic, Ltd.
E. Rogers and Daniel J. Buller, of Foulston Siefkin LLP, of
Wichita, for appellee Jakel Motors Inc.
Bruns, P.J., Hill and Schroeder, JJ.
Military Living, LLC, and Corvias Military Construction, LLC,
(collectively referred to as "Corvias") appeal a
summary judgment granted in favor of Ventamatic, Ltd., and
Jakel, Inc., by the district court. Corvias originally filed
this lawsuit against multiple defendants, alleging that
bathroom exhaust fans installed in private housing units
constructed for the families of military personnel stationed
at Fort Riley were defective. Corvias claimed that a
defective motor in the exhaust fans caused two fires and
widespread malfunctions. Ventamatic manufactured the exhaust
fans, and Jakel made the electrical motors used in the fans.
to the entry of summary judgment, Corvias voluntarily
dismissed all of the defendants except for Ventamatic and
Jakel. In granting summary judgment to Ventamatic and Jakel,
the district court found that the economic loss doctrine
barred recovery. Specifically, the district court found that
the bathroom exhaust fans and the housing units were
integrated systems. In addition, the district court
determined that Corvias could not recover under an implied
warranty theory because bathroom exhaust fans are not
we find that the bathroom exhaust fans and the housing units
are not part of an integrated system, we conclude that the
district court erred in finding that the economic loss
doctrine barred Corvias from proceeding on its product
liability claim against Ventamatic and Jakel. In
light of this conclusion, we do not reach the issue of
whether the exhaust ...