Schouton v. Kilmer
New York Supreme Court
On the 25th February, 1851, the plaintiff, being a householder, having a family which he supported in this county, and being the owner of a house and lot, called his homestead, in said county, and on which he resided with his said family, of the value not exceeding four hundred dollars, filed in the clerk’s office of this county, a notice in writing, as required by the act of April 10, 1850, {L. of 1850, p. 499,) entitled “An act to exempt from sale on execution the…
Read the full summary
On the 25th February, 1851, the plaintiff, being a householder, having a family which he supported in this county, and being the owner of a house and lot, called his homestead, in said county, and on which he resided with his said family, of the value not exceeding four hundred dollars, filed in the clerk’s office of this county, a notice in writing, as required by the act of April 10, 1850, {L. of 1850, p. 499,) entitled “An act to exempt from sale on execution the homestead of a householder having a family,” containing a full description of such homestead, and that he designed to hold the…
1Opinion of the Court
Willard, Justice.
The act of 1850, (L. 1850, p. 499,) does not exempt the homestead of a householder from sale on execution, except for debts contracted after the passage of that law. If the execution be issued upon a judgment in tort, the homestead is not exempt. A judgment for costs, in an action of tort falls within the same rule. It is not a judgment for a debt contracted, &c.
There is a material difference between the language of the former exemption acts and that of 1850. The act of 1830, (2 R. S. 367,) exempts certain articles of personal property therein mentioned, from levy and sale…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Shelby v. ZieglerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Meredith v. HolmesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Buckley v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Church v. HayIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Massie v. EnyartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878