Benedict v. Bunnell
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court of the City of San Francisco. This was an action in the Court below for the foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain premises, in the city of San Francisco, executed by defendant, Bunnell. Bunnell answered, and thereon set up that at the date of the execution of the mortgage, he was a married man, and that the mortgaged premises were subject to his homestead right.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of the City of San Francisco. This was an action in the Court below for the foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain premises, in the city of San Francisco, executed by defendant, Bunnell. Bunnell answered, and thereon set up that at the date of the execution of the mortgage, he was a married man, and that the mortgaged premises were subject to his homestead right. On the trial of the cause, the Court sent a number of special issues to the jury, who answered them as follows: 1. The jury find the amount due on the mortgage to be one thousand eight hundred and…
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The defendant executed a note and mortgage to plaintiff. At the date of the note and mortgage, the defendant was a married man, but his wife was not then a resident of this State.
The only question in this case was settled in the case of Cary v. Tice and wife, decided at the last term of this Court. “ The premises never were impressed with the character of a homestead until actual residence upon them hy the family/-’
So much of the judgment of the Court below as is appealed from is reversed, and that Court will enter judgment in accordance with this opinion.
2Cited by10 opinions
- Campbell v. AdairMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
- Hale v. HeaslipSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Gambette v. BrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Tipton v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Austin v. StanleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1865
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.