Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re the Marriage of Sommers

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided May 25, 1990No. 63,700Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSix, J.

I concur in the result reached by the majority. I dissent from syllabus paragraphs two and three and from the associated portions of the opinion.

Under the facts of the instant case the alleged ground for the divorce was “incompatibility.” K.S.A. 60-1601(a)(l). “Failure to perform a material marital duty or obligation,” the only remaining “fault” ground, is not an issue in this case. K.S.A. 60-1601(a)(2). I agree that fault should not have been considered.

My disagreement with the majority arises from the following observations in the opinion:

“We conclude that in domestic relations actions it…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Parish v. ParishSupreme Court of Kansas · 1976
  2. Clark v. ClarkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API