Worked example: Damages Allocation in Kansas

Example inputs

Run this scenario in DocketMath using the Damages Allocation calculator.

Below is a jurisdiction-aware worked example for Kansas using DocketMath’s damages-allocation calculator.

This example assumes a civil case where the plaintiff’s damages theory is broken into multiple components (e.g., economic damages, non-economic damages, and an additional allocable exposure bucket). The goal is to show (1) how allocation mechanics work in DocketMath and (2) how a Kansas statute-of-limitations (SOL) gate can enable or block the modeling based on timing.

Kansas rules used in this example

Kansas provides a general/default SOL period for certain claims under:

• K.S.A. § 21-6701 (general SOL period: 0.5 years in this DocketMath jurisdiction dataset)
  Source: https://www.kslegislature.gov/li/s/statute/021_000_0000_chapter/021_067_0000_article/021_067_0001_section/021_067_0001_k.pdf?utm_source=openai

Per the brief’s instruction:

• No claim-type-specific sub-rule was found.
  That means we apply the general/default SOL period (0.5 years) rather than switching to a different time limit for a specialized claim category.

You’ll see this applied as a time-window filter in the calculator step.

Concrete scenario (example numbers)

Assume the following example dates:

• Case filing date: 2026-04-15
• Alleged injury/trigger date: 2025-11-01
• Elapsed time: ~5.5 months (≈ 0.46 years)

Damages inputs (component amounts):

Allocation weights for the model (must sum to 1.00):

• Economic allocation weight: 0.70
• Non-economic allocation weight: 0.28
• Additional exposure weight: 0.02

DocketMath calculator inputs (what you would enter)

Checkboxes and fields below reflect the typical “wizard-style” selections:

• Jurisdiction: US-KS
• SOL gate enabled using general/default period
• Use K.S.A. § 21-6701 general rule (0.5 years)
• Trigger date: 2025-11-01
• Filing date: 2026-04-15
• Economic damages: $120,000
• Non-economic damages: $80,000
• Additional exposure: $10,000
• Allocation weights: 0.70 / 0.28 / 0.02
• Total exposure computed from components (rather than overriding with a separate “total” field)

Example run

Now we run the example in DocketMath.

Run the Damages Allocation calculator using the example inputs above. Review the breakdown for intermediate steps (segments, adjustments, or rate changes) so you can see how each input moves the output. Save the result for reference and compare it to your actual scenario.

Step 1: SOL gate (Kansas general/default)

• General SOL period used: 0.5 years from K.S.A. § 21-6701
• Elapsed time: ~5.5 months ≈ 0.46 years

Because 0.46 years ≤ 0.5 years, the SOL gate passes in this example.

Step 2: Allocation mechanics

DocketMath’s allocation step uses your component amounts and selected weights to produce:

1. A component allocation breakdown (how the modeled “total exposure” is attributed)
2. A total allocated exposure (which should reconcile to the modeled total)
3. A jurisdiction-SOL status (pass/fail)

With total exposure = $210,000 and weights:

• Economic allocated amount
  = $210,000 × 0.70 = $147,000
• Non-economic allocated amount
  = $210,000 × 0.28 = $58,800
• Additional allocated exposure
  = $210,000 × 0.02 = $4,200

Step 3: Reconciliation check (inputs vs. model)

Your entered component amounts sum to:

• $120,000 (economic) + $80,000 (non-economic) + $10,000 (additional) = $210,000

The allocation breakdown above preserves that total, distributing it according to the chosen weights. That’s the key modeling idea: weights drive how the calculator narratively/quantitatively separates categories even when the total remains the same.

Output snapshot (what the calculator returns)

Quick workflow interpretation

For decision-making (without turning this into legal advice), two practical takeaways:

• Timing lever (SOL gate): In this baseline run, the SOL gate is not limiting because the trigger is within 0.5 years of filing.
• Model lever (weights): If you change the weights, the allocation mix changes even if the total exposure stays constant.

Sensitivity check

Now test how small changes affect outputs under Kansas’s general/default SOL period (0.5 years).

To test sensitivity, change one high-impact input (like the rate, start date, or cap) and rerun the calculation. Compare the outputs side by side so you can see how small input shifts affect the result.

1) Move the trigger date forward (keep amounts and weights constant)

Keep:

• Filing date: 2026-04-15
• Amounts: same as baseline ($210,000 total)
• Weights: 0.70 / 0.28 / 0.02

Change only:

• Trigger date from 2025-11-01 to 2025-10-01

This increases elapsed time by about 1 month, giving approximately:

• New elapsed time ≈ 6.5 months ≈ 0.54 years

Since 0.54 years > 0.5 years, the SOL gate is expected to flip:

• Expected SOL status: Fail

2) Keep SOL passing, change allocation weights

Reset trigger date back to the baseline 2025-11-01 so SOL remains Pass.

Change weights to:

• Economic weight: 0.60
• Non-economic weight: 0.38
• Additional weight: 0.02

Total stays $210,000, so allocations become:

• Economic allocated = 0.60 × 210,000 = $126,000
• Non-economic allocated = 0.38 × 210,000 = $79,800
• Additional allocated = 0.02 × 210,000 = $4,200

3) What this means for decision-makers (non-legal framing)

Use this sensitivity check to separate two levers:

• Timing lever (SOL gate): A small movement around 0.5 years can flip the calculator’s pass/fail flag under K.S.A. § 21-6701 (general/default).
• Model lever (weights): Allocation mix can shift materially due to weights, even when totals are unchanged.

Related reading

• Damages Allocation Guide for Alabama — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for Alaska — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for American Samoa — Comparative Fault Rules