Kansas Court of Appeals Upholds $22 Million Skid Steer Verdict for Paralyzed Worker

The Kansas Court of Appeals has affirmed a $22 million product liability verdict against Kubota Tractor Corporation in a case brought by a young farm worker who was paralyzed when a skid steer crushed him. In an opinion filed May 15, 2026, the court rejected Kubota's appeal and upheld the Reno County jury's finding that the company failed to adequately warn of a hidden crush hazard. The plaintiff, Kolton Kincaid, was represented by Michael J. Wyatt and Jesse Tanksley of Mann Wyatt Tanksley in Hutchinson, Kansas.

Case at a Glance

• Verdict: Over $22 million (reduced to $11,138,422.40 after the jury assigned Kubota 50% of the fault)
• Appellate Result: Affirmed by the Kansas Court of Appeals on May 15, 2026
• Case Type: Product Liability (Failure to Warn)
• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals (trial held in Reno County District Court)
• Original Verdict Date: November 14, 2023
• Plaintiff: Kolton Kincaid
• Defendant: Kubota Tractor Corporation
• Plaintiff Attorneys: Michael J. Wyatt and Jesse Tanksley, Mann Wyatt Tanksley

What Did the Kansas Court of Appeals Decide?

In a memorandum opinion, a three-judge panel affirmed the district court on both issues Kubota raised on appeal. Kubota had argued that the trial court should have granted it judgment as a matter of law, contending that it owed no duty to warn Kincaid and that Kincaid was required to present expert testimony on the standard of care.

The court disagreed on both points. It held that the extent of Kubota's duty to warn was a question for the jury, not something the court could decide as a matter of law. It also held that Kansas law does not require expert testimony to prevail on a failure-to-warn claim, because the adequacy of a warning is itself an issue for the jury.

The result leaves the jury's verdict in place. The panel wrote that it declined "to find that this trial was tainted by error." The full Kansas Court of Appeals opinion is available through CourtListener.

How Did the Skid Steer Injury Happen?

In November 2013, Kincaid and two other young workers were installing a fence on a farm. Because the ground was cold, wet, and muddy, the crew rode a Kubota SVL90 compact track loader out to the worksite, and Kincaid sat on the front step used to climb into the cab.

As the machine approached a ravine, Kincaid signaled the operator to raise the loader arms. When the operator did, the mechanism caught Kincaid between the grapple attachment and the cab overhang, compressing his spine. The injury left him a paraplegic.

According to the court's opinion, Kubota's records showed it had sold more than 136,000 skid steers in the United States between 2010 and 2023, and Kincaid's injury was the only reported instance of someone being hurt while riding on one.

Why Was the $22 Million Award Reduced?

The jury awarded damages of over $22 million but found Kubota 50% at fault. Under Kansas comparative fault rules, that finding cut the recovery in half, producing a judgment of $11,138,422.40. The verdict covered Kincaid's past and future medical expenses along with his pain, suffering, and mental anguish.

That breakdown is why the case is often described both as a $22 million verdict and an $11.1 million judgment. The larger figure reflects the jury's total damages finding, and the smaller figure reflects what Kubota was ordered to pay after the comparative fault reduction.

Why Did the Failure-to-Warn Claim Succeed?

Kubota's machine carried warnings that told users to "never carry riders" and not to allow passengers on any part of the machine. Kincaid's case did not dispute that those warnings existed. Instead, his human factors expert testified that the warnings did not tell users about the specific danger that injured him: the pinch point between the cab overhang and the loader arms, which the expert described as a latent hazard.

The jury concluded that a reasonable user might not have understood from the existing warnings that raising the front attachment could crush a person seated on the center step. The Court of Appeals found that conclusion was supported by the evidence and refused to overturn it.

Who Represented Kolton Kincaid?

Michael J. Wyatt and Jesse Tanksley of Mann Wyatt Tanksley tried the case and defended the verdict through appeal. After the original verdict, Wyatt said he was "thankful the jury saw through the defense team's arguments" and added that the firm was "so grateful for our client's courage and perseverance."

Tanksley said the goal throughout the case was making sure Kincaid "received justice, full compensation, and most importantly that his voice was heard."

Verdicts like this one deserve to be seen. Major Verdict is the only platform where plaintiff attorneys can publicly display their trial results and settlements, for free. Create your profile today and let your record speak for itself.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What does it mean that the verdict was upheld on appeal?

When a jury returns a verdict, the losing side can ask a higher court to review the trial for legal errors. Here, Kubota appealed and asked the Kansas Court of Appeals to throw out the verdict. The court reviewed the record, found no reversible error, and affirmed the verdict, which means the jury's decision stands.

Q: Why was the $22 million award reduced to $11.1 million?

The jury found Kubota 50% at fault for the injury. Kansas applies comparative fault, so the total damages of over $22 million were reduced in proportion to that finding, leaving a judgment of $11,138,422.40 against Kubota.

Q: What is a failure-to-warn product liability claim?

A failure-to-warn claim alleges that a product was made unreasonably dangerous because the manufacturer did not adequately warn users about a hazard. In this case, the plaintiff argued that Kubota's warnings did not specifically alert users to the crush hazard at the pinch point that caused his paralysis, and the jury agreed.