Fox v. Brannan
Michigan Supreme Court
1Dissent
It is fundamental that the right to a homestead given by the Constitution and by statute is to be liberally construed. See authorities collected in 114 A.L.R. 209. That right, however, is limited to property occupied by the homestead claimant — the law requires that there be both ownership and occupation by the homestead claimant. Wisner v. Farnham, 2 Mich. 472;Beecher v. Baldy, 7 Mich. 488; Hersehfeldt v.George, 6 Mich. 466 ; Fitzsimons v. Kane, 245 Mich. 246. In Dyson v. Sheley,11 Mich. 527, it was held that a levy could properly be made on the half of a double house that was occupied by a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Beecher v. BaldyMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
- Potter v. ClappIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Rhodes, Pegram & Co. v. McCormickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1857
- Lamont v. LeFevreMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- King v. WelbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.