Benedict v. Bunnell
Before: Burnett
Synopsis
Premises never assume the character of a homestead until actual residence thereon by the family.
Where the wife, at the date of the execution of the mortgage, was not a resident of the State, the homestead right cannot be sustained.
The case of Carey v. Tice, affirmed.
Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Murray, C. J., concurring.
The defendant executed a note and mortgage to plaintiff. At the date of the note and mortgage, the defendant was a married man, but his wife was not then a resident of this State.
The only question in this case was settled in the case of Cary v. Tice and wife, decided at the last term of this Court. “ The premises never were impressed with the character of a homestead until actual residence upon them hy the family/-’
So much of the judgment of the Court below as is appealed from is reversed, and that Court will enter judgment in accordance with this opinion.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)