Did the District Court Err in Granting Summary Judgment Against Gaumer on His Negligence Claim?
Gaumer initially argues the district court erred in terminating his negligence claim. Specifically, Gaumer alleged that RT&T was negligent in failing to warn of a potentially dangerous condition of the baler at the time of the sale. Although Gaumer designated an expert who testified as to the dangerous condition of the baler, this expert did not present testimony on the standard of care applicable to a seller of such equipment. Gaumer argued below and on appeal that such an expert is unnecessary because the duty was within the common knowledge of jurors. In granting summary judgment against Gaumer, the district court rejected this argument, stating: “The Court agrees with Defendant that the duty of a farm implement dealer in rural Shawnee County is beyond the capability of the lay person to decide. “The Court agrees that the average juror in Shawnee County, though it is in an agrarian state such as Kansas, is not going to have sufficient knowledge of the used farm implement industry to
