Stone v. Darnell
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Nat. M. Burford. Suit by appellant against appellee to recover fourteen and a half acres of land near the town of Dallas. Plaintiff had purchased the land at a sale under an execution against defendant; and the defence was, that the premises were defendant’s homestead.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Nat. M. Burford. Suit by appellant against appellee to recover fourteen and a half acres of land near the town of Dallas. Plaintiff had purchased the land at a sale under an execution against defendant; and the defence was, that the premises were defendant’s homestead. It was proved that there was no settlement on the land at the date of the levy; that the land sued for was timbered land; there was some hewed timber on the ground when the levy was made, about where defendant’s house now stands. Defendant was living with his family on the land at…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
The Constitution declares that the homestead of a family, not to exceed two hundred acres of land (not included in a town or city lot or lots) in value not to exceed two thousand dollars, shall not be subject to forced sale for any debts hereafter contracted. Where the land of a defendant in execution is sold for the payment of debts contracted since the time the Constitution went into operation, and the land is claimed by him as exempt under the homestead right from forced sale, it would seem that the only question which can arise (except where the vendor of the land is…
2Cited by33 opinions
- Houston & Great Northern R. R. v. WinterTexas Supreme Court · 1876
- American Freehold Land Mortgage Co. of London v. PaceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- McCray v. Miller &8212 Bland v. BlandSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
- Christy v. DyerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863
- Weare v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.