10
The district court properly granted the Board's request for summary judgment following
Parcells' failure to provide sufficient evidence of controverted material facts.
Parcells argues the district court failed to appreciate and consider the factual
kinship shared by this case and his consumer protection litigation. He claims the court's
failure to heed the extensive record in the latter case was particularly problematic because
it involved identical facts and responsive pleadings. According to Parcells, facts were
contested "in his Answers to Requests for Admissions in the 'companion' consumer
protection [c]ase."
"Summary judgment is appropriate when the pleadings, depositions, answers to
interrogatories, admissions on file, and supporting affidavits show that no genuine issue
exists as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of
law. The district court must resolve all facts and reasonable inferences drawn from the
evidence in favor of the party against whom the ruling is sought. When opposing
summary judgment, a party must produce evidence to establish a dispute as to a material
fact. In order to preclude summary judgment, the facts subject to the dispute must be
material to the conclusive issue in the case. Appellate courts apply the same rules and,
where they find reasonable minds could differ as to the conclusions drawn from the
evidence, summary judgment is inappropriate. Appellate review of the legal effect of
undisputed facts is de novo. See Northern Natural Gas Co. v. ONEOK Field Services
Co., 310 Kan. 644, 448 P.3d 383 (2019)." GFT Lenexa, LLC v. City of Lenexa, 310 Kan.
976, 981-82, 453 P.3d 304 (2019).
When making summary judgment decisions, district courts contemplate the
evidence presented by each party. See O'Brien v. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc.,
294 Kan. 318, 330, 277 P.3d 1062 (2012) (quoting Shamberg, Johnson & Bergman,
Chtd. v. Oliver, 289 Kan. 891, 900, 220 P.3d 333 [2009] (noting that when reviewing
courts "find reasonable minds could differ as to the conclusions drawn from the evidence,
summary judgment must be denied"). Therefore, these decisions necessarily include
prerequisite evidentiary findings. Here, Parcells suggests that the responses provided in