Kendall v. Kendall
Decision Date | 14 May 1897 |
Docket Number | 317 |
Citation | 48 P. 940,5 Kan.App. 688 |
Parties | GEORGE KENDALL v. LIZZIE A. KENDALL |
Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
May 14 1897.
Error from Harper District Court. Hon. G. W. McKay, Judge. Opinion filed May 14, 1897. Modified.
Case remanded.
Anderson & Henderson, and John W. Shartell, for plaintiff in error.
Beardsley & Gregory, for defendant in error.
On the seventeenth day of June, 1893, Lizzie A. Kendall obtained judgment for divorce against George Kendall in the District Court of Harper County. She was also given certain real estate and two thousand dollars in money as her alimony. The care, custody and education of Rachel Pearl Kendall and George William Kendall, minor children, were confided to her exclusively. No further provision for the minor children was made.
On the second day of June, 1894, Lizzie A. Kendall, the plaintiff below, filed her motion in the District Court of Harper County, to modify and change the decree rendered on the seventeenth day of June, 1893. Notice of the hearing of said motion was duly served. By consent of the parties the hearing of said motion was set for August 20 1894. The defendant appeared and filed his motion to dismiss the motion of plaintiff to modify the decree, and to strike said motion from the files.
The court sustained the motion so far as it related to modifying and altering the decree as to permanent alimony; and overruled it so far as it attacked plaintiff's motion for an order modifying and changing the decree as to the support education and provision for the minor children. The further hearing was continued until the October term, 1894, when the case was heard by the court on the motion of plaintiff to modify and change the decree and order in so far as said decree and order made provision for the care, custody, support and education of the minor children of the plaintiff and defendant. All parties were present and the court made the following order.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Effland v. Effland, 38419
...Rowell, supra, and points out that in those cases the divorce had been obtained upon publication service, but following Kendall v. Kendall, 5 Kan.App. 688, 48 P. 940, in which, like the case then before the court, the divorce had been granted upon personal service of the defendant, and conc......
-
Phillips v. Phillips
... ... the jurisdiction which it has under the statute ... In an ... unbroken line of cases from Kendall v. Kendall, 5 ... Kan.App. 688, 48 P. 940, down to the recent case of Hayn ... v. Hayn, 162 Kan. 189, 175 P.2d 127, it has been held ... that the ... ...
-
State ex rel. Groves v. First Judicial District Court of Ormsby County
...notice under the circumstances existing in the particular case. Cornelison v. Cornelison, supra; Wells v. Wells, supra; Kendall v. Kendall, 5 Kan. App. 688, 48 P. 940. As district court acquired jurisdiction to entertain the motion to modify, it also had jurisdiction to allow counsel fees f......
-
Davis v. Davis
... ... We do not believe ... the statute was intended to be thus interpreted. In the early ... case of Kendall v. Kendall, 5 Kan.App. 688, 48 P ... 940, the latter condition existed and the court reversed the ... trial court and held the payments should ... ...