Randal v. Elder
Supreme Court of Kansas
*Error from Franklin district court. Action by Randal to determine the adverse estate or interest of Elder in lots 1, 3, 5, and 7, in block 32, in the city of Ottawa. In 1864 the Ottawa Town Company sold to Randal lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. 8, 9, and 10, in said block 32, which, at that time, had been surveyed and staked off, but its plat had not yet been filed of record.
Read the full summary
*Error from Franklin district court. Action by Randal to determine the adverse estate or interest of Elder in lots 1, 3, 5, and 7, in block 32, in the city of Ottawa. In 1864 the Ottawa Town Company sold to Randal lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. 8, 9, and 10, in said block 32, which, at that time, had been surveyed and staked off, but its plat had not yet been filed of record. A twenty-foot alley runs through the block, the odd-numbered lots being on one side of the alley, and the even-numbered lots on the other. Randal at once inclosed the lots and alley between in one inclosure,— the whole being…
1Opinion of the CourtValentine, J.
The only question involved in this case is whether a debtor can, under any circumstances, hold as a homestead, under *204the homestead exemption laws, two or more lots or pieces or parcels of land situated within an incorporated town or city, when such'lots, pieces, or parcels of land are separated by an alley. We must answer this question in the negative. A homestead must consist of only one tract or body of land. Bunker v. Locke, 15 Wis. 638; True v. Morrill, 28 Vt. 672; Walters v. People, 18 Ill. 194; Kresin v. Mann, 15 Minn. 116, (Gil. 87.) Such, we think, is the obvious meaning of…
2Cases cited121 opinions
- Hixon v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Flint & Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Barton v. DrakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Ashton v. IngleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
- Showers v. RobinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
116 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.