60-1611.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-1611; L. 1965, ch. 355, § 7; L. 1978, ch. 231, § 31; L. 1982, ch. 152, § 10; L. 2000, ch. 171, § 80; Repealed, L. 2011, ch. 26, § 47; July 1.
Source or prior law:
L. 1907, ch. 184, § 1; R.S. 1923, 60-1518; L. 1935, ch. 220, § 1.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Divorce and Alimony Under the New Code," Dan Hopson, Jr., 12 K.L.R. 27, 46 (1963).
Discussed and compared to prior law in 1963-65 survey of family law, John W. Brand, Jr., and Dan Hopson, Jr., 14 K.L.R. 271, 275, 276 (1965).
"Jurisdiction in Kansas Child Custody Cases," Terry L. Kramer, 8 W.L.J. 48, 55, 56, 57, 58 (1968).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Family Law," Camilla Klein Haviland, 27 K.L.R. 241, 250 (1979).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-1518 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Mentioned; constitutionality not determined. Cusintz v. Cusintz, 195 Kan. 301, 302, 404 P.2d 164.
2. Discussed; action for custody and maintenance of minor children entirely different from one of divorce. Perrenoud v. Perrenoud, 206 Kan. 559, 573, 574, 575, 480 P.2d 749.
3. Construed and applied; full faith and credit has limited application to a child custody decree. Anderson v. Anderson, 214 Kan. 387, 392, 395, 520 P.2d 1239.
4. Court did not err in considering present value of future interests in land in division of property. McCain v. McCain, 219 Kan. 780, 784, 787, 549 P.2d 896.
5. Court had jurisdiction over ex-husband who had been granted divorce in Ohio without obtaining personal jurisdiction; division of property ordered. Kendall v. Kendall, 224 Kan. 624, 625, 627, 629, 631, 585 P.2d 978.
6. Plaintiff herein did not meet requirements of exception in statute; judgment of divorce in foreign state entitled to full faith and credit. Johnson v. Johnson, 233 Kan. 198, 201, 202, 204, 662 P.2d 1178 (1983).
7. Error in awarding past-due support under provisions of K.S.A. 60-1610 examined. In re Marriage of Brown, 247 Kan. 152, 795 P.2d 375 (1990).
8. Attorney fees may be determined after entry of final judgment without offending doctrine of res judicata (child custody proceeding based on Czech Republic order giving mother custody of 10 year old son). Magstadtova v. Magstadt 31 Kan. App. 2d 1091, 77 P.3d 1283 (2003).
|
|