Reske v. Reske
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court of Detroit.* (Chipman, J.) Injunction bill to restrain enforcement of execution. Complainant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Detroit.* (Chipman, J.) Injunction bill to restrain enforcement of execution. Complainant appeals. No premises can be a homestead without a dwelling-house thereon, and the actual resi-deuce of the family therein: Smyth on Homesteads § 68; Goolc v. McGhrisUan 4 Cal. 26 ; Ga/ry v. Tice 6 Cal. 626 ; there is no such thing as a future contemplated homestead : Wisner v. Farnham 2 Mich. 472; Dyson v. Sheley 11 Mich. 627; Ooolidge v. Wells 20 Mich. 79; Hale v. Heaslip 16 la. 451; Campbell v. Ayres 18 la. 252; Christy v. Dyer 14 la. 488; Elston v. Robinson 23 la.…
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
The bill in this case is liled to protect a homestead right, and to enjoin a threatened sale upon execution.
The facts appear to be that in January, 1880, complainant purchased a city lot on the corner of Chene and Mother streets, in Detroit, intending to make of. it a homestead. He was then a single man, but was anticipating the arrival very shortly of a young woman from Germany whom he was to marry. The woman came on, and they were married immediately, according to the previous expectation. Neither of them seems to have had means, but they caused the lot to be fenced, and commenced making…
2Cited by26 opinions
- Scofield v. HopkinsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Kingman v. O'CallaghanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Jossman v. RiceMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Mills v. HobbsMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Stowell v. KerrSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.