Kelly v. Dill
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action was brought on March 25, 1876, in the district court for Winona county, against William H. Dill, Felix 'Brennan, J. F. Tourtelotte, Edward Gilmore, and Margaret Gilmore, his wife.
Read the full summary
This action was brought on March 25, 1876, in the district court for Winona county, against William H. Dill, Felix 'Brennan, J. F. Tourtelotte, Edward Gilmore, and Margaret Gilmore, his wife. In his complaint the plaintiff alleges the following facts : Defendant Gilmore is a resident of Winona county, and for ten years last past has been, and now is, a married man and the head of a family, and on October 29, 1874, was the owner of the east half of the south-east quarter of section 3, in township 105 north, of range 6 west, in said county. Shortly before October 29, 1874, Gilmore purchased…
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
This court decided, in Kresin v. Mau, 15 Minn. 116, that, to constitute a homestead, the residence or dwelling of the party claiming it must be, or must have been, situated on the land claimed. In this case Gilmore’s residence or dwelling had, ¿it the time of levying the attachment, never been situated on the land. He had merely intended to make the land his homestead, and had purchased it for that purpose. It was, therefore, not his homestead when the attachment was levied.
*438The only question remaining is, can the owner defeat the lien ot an attachment previously levied, by moving upon the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tuttle v. HoweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1869
- Kresin v. MauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1870
3Cited by20 opinions
- Focke, Wilkens & Lange & Scott v. Leon & BlumTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Brace & Hergert Mill Co. v. BurbankWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Nickerson v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Baird v. TriceTexas Supreme Court · 1879
- Hines v. DuncanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.