Bixman v. Bixman

85 P.2d 590, 149 Kan. 2, 1939 Kan. LEXIS 2
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bixman v. Bixman. Read the opinion of the Court — 148 Kan. 597
Supreme Court of Kansas·Decided December 24, 1938·No. No. 34,044·Published

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

HaRvey, J.:

Appellant's motion for rehearing has been considered by the court and is overruled.

Our attention is called specifically to the fact that the attorney [3]*3who appeared for appellant in this court did not represent the appellant in the trial court. Since the judgment of the trial court, which we affirmed, rested largely on the opening statement of counsel, we might very well have noted the fact that there had been a change of counsel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bixman v. Bixman, 85 P.2d 590, 149 Kan. 2, 1939 Kan. LEXIS 2 (kan 1938).

85 P.2d 590 (Bixman v. Bixman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.