¶1(concurring specially): I have not agreed heretofore with everything that has been said by this court as to the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the probate 'court to hear certain actions. (See my dissenting opinion in Shively v. Burr, 157 Kan. 336, 139 P. 2d 401.) However, it is now well settled that the holding of this court in Foss v. Wiles, 155 Kan. 262, 124 P. 2d 438; Yeager v. Yeager, 155 Kan. 734, 129 P. 2d 242, and Shively v. Burr, supra, is the law of this state. Since this is true, I concur in the result reached in the majority opinion. Those opinions and the analogous opinions on the subject, already mentioned in the majority opinion, require a reversal of this judgment.
158 Kan. 345
Gustafson v. Bowling
Decided April 8, 1944
Supreme Court of Kansas · decided 1944-04-08
Relies on Foss v. Wiles · Yeager v. Yeager · Shively v. Burr
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1944-04-08
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently February 1984 · most notably Clutter v. Hill (1947), Bourke v. Bourke (1945)
2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →