Ring v. Burt
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery from Clinton Circuit. It appeared that Ira Ring, husband of complainant, owned the premises in question, and that he occupied the same as his homestead with the complainant, his wife, till the time of his death; that defendant, Daniel Burt, Della Burt (his wife, and daughter of complainant) and their children also lived with them; that said Ira Ring owned no other lands, and the premises were worth over §1,600. Testimony was introduced, under objection,…
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery from Clinton Circuit. It appeared that Ira Ring, husband of complainant, owned the premises in question, and that he occupied the same as his homestead with the complainant, his wife, till the time of his death; that defendant, Daniel Burt, Della Burt (his wife, and daughter of complainant) and their children also lived with them; that said Ira Ring owned no other lands, and the premises were worth over §1,600. Testimony was introduced, under objection, tending to show that said 4Ira Ring had entered into a verbal agreement with said Daniel Burt, by the terms of which the…
1Opinion of the Court
Christiancy J.
The deed of October 9, 1865, from Ira Ring to his daughter, Della Burt, without the signature of complainant, then his wife, was, both by the constitution and the statutes, void, as against the complainant’s right to a homestead. See Const. Art. 16, § 2; Comp. L. Oh. 132, §§i, 2.
This is not denied so far as the question depends upon the deed alone. But defendant insists that the deed was made in consideration and pursuance of a verbal agreement between Ira Ring and complainant, then his wife, on the one side, and the defendants on the other, by which the defendants were to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beecher v. BaldyMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by15 opinions
- Riggs v. SterlingMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Snyder v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Showers v. RobinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Phillips v. StauchMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- Kimball v. SalisburyUtah Supreme Court · 1898
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.