Legal Opinion

Schlup v. Thrasher

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 25, 1921PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from tlie Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) Where a homestead is part only of an estate held in common, it is subject to partition. E. S. 1909, sec. 6713; Becker v. McLinn, 107 Mo. 277. (2) The primary duty of the court is to set the homestead off in kind; but when this cannot be done the statute specifically directs the procedure and limits it with care. E. S. 1909, sec. 6714; Dalton v. Simpson, 270 Mo. 287, 297 et seq.

Read the full summary

Appeal from tlie Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) Where a homestead is part only of an estate held in common, it is subject to partition. E. S. 1909, sec. 6713; Becker v. McLinn, 107 Mo. 277. (2) The primary duty of the court is to set the homestead off in kind; but when this cannot be done the statute specifically directs the procedure and limits it with care. E. S. 1909, sec. 6714; Dalton v. Simpson, 270 Mo. 287, 297 et seq. This is the only law' authorizing the deprivation of a widow and minor child of their homestead; and it does not sanction placing the proceeds in…

1Opinion of the CourtBeadley, J.

Plaintiffs, Bertha Schlup and her son, Prank Schlup, are the widow and minor son of William Schlup, deceased; and defendants are- the adult son and daughters. William Schlup died testate in Texas County on January 5, 1919, seized of an estate of inheritance consisting of 240 acres of land which was a homestead. On January 20, 1919, the widow duly renounced her rights under the will and elected to take under the statute. Thereafter plaintiffs filed this cause which we take to be bottomed on section 6714, Eevised Statutes 1909, now sec. 5863, Eevised statutes 1919, al though the petition is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Brewington v. BrewingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
  2. Dalton v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
  3. Coleman v. ColemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
  4. Fenwick v. WheatleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Daniels v. PeckMissouri Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. Osborn v. OsbornMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API