Opinion ID: 1261484
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Third: Did the trial court abuse its discretion in dividing the property equally between defendant in error and her husband?

Text: This question is answered in the negative. It is agreed that the law of Kansas is applicable to the matters of substance involved in this action. In Harris v. Harris, 169 Kan. 339, 219 P.2d 454, 456, decided just a few months ago, it was said: The rule in this jurisdiction has always been that a division of property made by the trial court in a divorce case will not be disturbed on appellate review unless it is clearly made to appear its action in making that division amounted to abuse of discretion. We cannot say that, by the entry of a judgment awarding the wife a sum equal to one half of the amount which the trial court found to be the value of property acquired during the course of a marriage which lasted for twenty years, any abuse of discretion is clearly made to appear. The judgment is accordingly affirmed. JACKSON and ALTER, JJ., who dissented from the opinion of the court in cause No. 16003, do not by concurring herein indicate any modification of their dissent from the court's opinion in said cause. However, accepting the former opinion as the law of the case to which their dissent is already noted, they concur herein. STONE and HOLLAND, JJ., not participating.