Rix v. McHenry
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, in the County of San Francisco. This was an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain premises, executed and delivered by Jesse McHenry to the plaintiff, Rix.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, in the County of San Francisco. This was an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain premises, executed and delivered by Jesse McHenry to the plaintiff, Rix. McHenry, in his defence, set up, that after the execution of the moi’tgage, he applied for the benefit of the insolvent law in the Fourth Judicial District, and that a portion of the mortgaged premises had been set aside by the decree of that Court as his homestead. His wife also filed a petition of intervention, setting forth that she never signed the…
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
As to the action of the Court below in refusing to set aside any portion of the mortgaged premises as a homestead, we think there was no error. The point was settled in the case of Cary v. Tice and Wife, decided at the last term of the Court. The phrase “resident of this State,” in the second section of the Homestead Act, means an actual and not a constructive presence.
We think that there was no error in the action of the Twelfth. District Court after the commencement of the proceedings in insolvency. It is true, that under the provisions of the fourteenth section of the act, “ all suits…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Campbell v. AdairMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
- Isaac v. SwiftCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Robinson v. HughesIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Gibson v. MundellOhio Supreme Court · 1876
- Loring v. WittichSupreme Court of Florida · 1878
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.