Meyer v. Adler (1856) · DecisionDepot

Meyer v. Adler

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Dec 20, 1856 No. No. 1088Published

Before: Murray, Terry

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a property cannot constitute a homestead without actual occupancy by the family and a clear intention to dedicate the premises to that purpose.

Issues

Whether the premises in question constitute a homestead under the law.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the homestead is the family residence, and in order to constitute a homestead there must be an actual occupancy, with the intention of dedicating the premises to such purpose.”

“there was no occupation of the premises by the family nor any act which evidenced an intention to devote them to the purposes of a residence”

Synopsis

APPEAL from Superior Court, San Francisco County.

TERRY, J. — The question involved in this case has been decided by this court in the ease of Taylor v. Hargous, 4 Cal. 268, 60 Am. Dec. 606, and Hayden v. Penny, decided at the July term, 1856. In the latter case we held “that the homestead is the family residence, and in order to constitute a homestead there must be an actual occupancy, with the intention of dedicating the premises to such purpose.”

In the case under consideration there was no occupation of the premises by the family nor any act which evidenced an intention to devote them to the purposes of a residence; on the contrary, the character of the building erected and the disposition made of it prove conclusively that it was intended for an entirely different object.

Judgment reversed.

I concur: Murray, O. J.

Meyer v. Adler

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief