The opinion
HOLLINGSWORTH, Judge
(dissent■ing).
While I agree with the conclusions reached by the majority on the merits of this appeal, I must respectfully dissent from the finding that this court has jurisdiction '“because the amount in dispute exceeds "the sum of $7,500.” (Emphasis supplied.)
A search of the briefs reveals that there is no justiciable dispute whatever between the parties as to the amount of alimony .awarded. The sole question presented is whether the judgment granting plaintiff a • divorce was valid or invalid. If valid, the award of alimony stands; if invalid, it fails. "The petition for divorce prayed -for no specific amount of alimony. Neither is there any showing that if the decree of di-vorce granted plaintiff was valid, yet plaintiff was not entitled to any award of alimony; or that, if she was entitled to some allowance, yet the amount allowed was excessive to the extent of more than $7,500. Under these circumstances, I make this query: How may we determine that the amount of alimony in dispute exceeds $7,500?
It seems to me that under the facts in this case alimony as such and the amount thereof is purely collateral and incidental to the one issue involved on this appeal, to wit: the validity of the decree of divorce. Hence, I am persuaded this court has no jurisdiction of this cause and I sincerely feel that, in assuming jurisdiction, we transgress the limitations fixed by Article V, Section 3, of the Constitution; and that, in so doing, we set a bad precedent.
I would transfer the appeal to the Kansas City Court of Appeals.