Geary County Judge Platt to sit with Kansas Supreme Court

TOPEKA — Geary County District Court Judge David R. Platt has been appointed to sit with the Supreme Court Tuesday, September 9, to hear oral arguments in a civil case.

After hearing oral arguments, Platt will join Supreme Court justices in their deliberations and opinion drafting.

“I really appreciate that Judge Platt is willing to take time from his duties in Geary County to come to Topeka to sit with the Supreme Court,” said Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss.

Platt, who has been a district court judge in Geary County since 1993, said he is looking forward to sitting with the state’s high court.

“It’s a compliment and an honor to be invited to hear oral arguments and to deliberate a case with the Supreme Court,” Platt said.

Before becoming a judge, Platt was in private law practice, was a city commissioner, mayor and city attorney in Junction City, and twice was assistant Geary County attorney. He graduated from Washburn University School of Law.

All Supreme Court oral arguments are webcast live through the Watch Supreme Court Live! link in the right-hand column of the Kansas Judicial Branch website at www.kscourts.org.

The case Platt will hear is scheduled at 9 a.m. Tuesday, September 9:

Appeal No. 106,092: In the Matter of the Marriage of David M. Traster and Debra C. Traster

Sedgwick County: (Petition for Review) Appeal arises out of a dispute over a 2004 postnuptial agreement that granted the wife substantially all of the marital assets if the marriage dissolved. When the husband filed for divorce three years later, he sought equitable distribution of marital assets. The district court found the agreement was contrary to public policy and was a separation agreement subject to equitable review. The wife appealed to the Court of Appeals which was reversed and remanded with directions. The Supreme Court granted the petitioner husband's petition for review. Issues on review include whether the Court of Appeals decision is contrary to the general rule in Kansas that requires a fairness review of postnuptial agreements at the time of a divorce; whether the Court of Appeals erred in adopting a new standard of review; and whether the Court of Appeals should have applied the general rules set forth in Ranney v Ranney, 219 Kan 428.