This is a disambiguation page — a navigational aid which lists other pages that might otherwise share the same title. If an article link referred you here, you might want to go back and fix it to point directly to the intended page.
Clanton wanted to dismiss the case and immediately refile it so she could serve both Estivo and the Fund and still keep the same trial date.
In lieu of an answer, Estivo filed a motion to dismiss Clanton III with prejudice, contending that Clanton's claim was barred by the 2-year statute of limitations and that the savings statute, K.S.A. 60-518, did not allow Clanton another extension of the limitations period in light of her two prior dismissals.
Clanton's counsel claims they reasonably relied upon the trial court's ruling dismissing the case without prejudice and plaintiff should not be precluded from pursuing her claims.
Feeds |
Contact