The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-11-07
MUST KEEP OUT.
Divorced Husbands Have No In
terest in Wives Estate.
Six Months Period Gives Him
No Rights.
QUESTION OFTEN UP.
Was Raised in Case Of William
Johnson, of Topeka.
Tried to Get Divorced Deceased
Wife's Money.
QUESTION OFTEN UP.

If one of two divorced persons dies
within six months of the date of the di-
vorce the other has no interest in the
estate of the deceased. according to an
opinion rendered today by the supreme
court This question has been coming
before district courts in Kansas for
years, but has never before been passed
upon by the supreme court.
S. H. Durland and Debbie Durland
were divorced in Mcpherson county two
years ago after 80 years of married life.
The decree stated that the divorce
should mot become absolute and take
effect until the expiration of six months
from date" In the division of property,
Durland was required to pay his wife
$1,000 He paid the amount within three
months after the decree had been grant
ed and shortly after that Mrs. Durland
died. intestate leaving $1,755.
Durland claimed an interest in the
money on the ground that the divorce
had not become effective and that she
was still his wife. He was beaten in
both the probate and the district courts
and appealed to the supreme court
which affirms the decisions of the lower
courts The supreme court says that
the parties are no longer bound by any
marital ties after the decree has been
granted, except that they cannot re-
marry within six months. The court
says:
THE prohibition upon marriage with
in six months was the only limitation
upon the jud gment as an utter ami
hilation of the former marital status
If no appeal were taken the ties which
had bound the individuals together
were absolutely and unqualifiedly
broken asunder. The parties were each
as fully absolved from every marital
right and duty and consequence as they
fTIlI
restored to the freedom they enjoyed
before marriage in every respect, ex-
cept that they could not marry for SIX
months. Indeed, had the legislature
withheld that privilege forever, still no
element of the relation of husband and
wife wound have continued to exist"
The decisions of the courts upon this
question have heretofore been the other
way The question first came up in
Shawnee county a number of years ago
and went to the court of appeals, which
held that the husband and wife remain
ed such for all purposes until the ex-
pira ton of six months after the decree
was granted. This decision has since
been followed, but many lawyers have
commended that the six months stay
in divorce cases did not affect property
rights.
Another Shawnee county case which
has attracted considerable attention in
which this question enters is the W.
H. johnson case. now pending in the
supreme court. ABOUT three years ago
W. H. johnson deserted his wife and
children here. and Mrs. Johnson OBJ
tanned a decree of divorce. She made
a will attempting to bequeath all her
property, inherited from her parents.
to her children. and in the event of
their death the property was to go to
her brother. She died within four
hours of the expirat ton of the six
months after the decree was granted.
and less than a year later both chill
dren died Johnson then returned and
claimed all the property. L. S. Wool
verton. the executor of the estate and
trustee of the children, tried to pre-
vent Johnson from getting the prop
erty- The case was tried before Judge
Hazen. and he remarked when render
ing his decision that his former views
as to the law in the case had been con-
siderably shaken, but that he would
follow the rule laid down by the court
! of appeals This gave the property to
Johnson, and the case was appealed to
the supreme court. where it will come
up for hearing next spring
In the meantime the Durland case
had reached the supreme court and was
argued last June, but the court, upon
its own motion, ordered it to be re-
argued at the October sitting. At that
time w. F. SchOch and FIG. Dreaming,
who represented Woolverton in the
johnson case. broke into the DurIand
case with briefs and were allowed to
| present them, as both the court and the
| lawyers seemed anxious to have the law
points settled. The decision in the Dur-
land case does not fully settle the John
son case, but the attorneys say it goes
| far towards it.