Foster & Hannum v. Byrne
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Clinton District Court. Plaintiffs brought an action on an account for goods and merchandise sold to defendant. They sued out a writ of attachment, which was levied on certain real estate. Defendant moved to discharge the property from the levy, on the ground that it was exempt from seizure. The court sustained that motion, and the present appeal is from that order.
1Opinion of the CourtReed, J.
— The debt for the recovery of which the suit was brought was contracted prior to March 1, 1884. The attached property was purchased by defendant on the thirty-first of January, 1887, and paid for out of money received by him from the government of the United States as a pension ; a pension certificate having been issued to him on the nineteenth of October, 1886. He intended when he purchased the property to ocoupy it as a homestead, and, shortly after the attachment was levied, he entered into it with his family, and has since continued to occupy it as a place of residence.
This court has…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Edwards v. KearzeySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Gunn v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Walker v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Webb v. HoltSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Baugh v. BarrettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bagnall v. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1947
- Crow v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Brown v. GordonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Joyce v. RussellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Willard v. SturmSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896