Smith v. Kidd

Michigan Supreme Court

Smith v. Kidd

81 N.W. 1092, 123 Mich. 193, 1900 Mich. LEXIS 785

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 6, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 81 N.W. 1092 (Smith v. Kidd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith v. Kidd, 81 N.W. 1092, 123 Mich. 193, 1900 Mich. LEXIS 785 (Mich. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). If complainant had not abandoned his homestead, it would follow that there can be no abandonment if the party will testify that he intended at some future time to return to it. Ownership and occupancy are both required by the Constitution and statute to establish a homestead. Const, art. 16, § 2; 3 Comp. Laws 1897, § 10362. Temporary absence has often been held not to destroy the occupancy required. Complainant testified: “I don’t know as I will come back to New Buffalo at all. * * * I think I will make my home in East Tawas. I have not fully made up my mind to this. I have been thinking of this about a year.” The abandonment was complete. The circuit judge was right in dismissing the bill. The case is ruled by Hoffman v. Buschman, 95 Mich. 538 (55 N. W. 458), where the defendants made a much stronger case than has the complainant in this.

Decree affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). If complainant had not abandoned his homestead, it would follow that there can be no abandonment if the party will testify that he intended at some future time to return to it. Ownership and occupancy are both required by the Constitution and statute to establish a homestead. Const, art. 16, § 2; 3 Comp. Laws 1897, § 10362. Temporary absence has often been held not to destroy the occupancy required. Complainant testified: “I don’t know as I will come back to New Buffalo at all. * * * I think I will make my home in East Tawas. I have not fully made up my mind to this. I have been thinking of this about a year.” The abandonment was complete. The circuit judge was right in dismissing the bill. The case is ruled by Hoffman v. Buschman, 95 Mich. 538 (55 N. W. 458), where the defendants made a much stronger case than has the complainant in this.

Decree affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 N.W. 1092, 123 Mich. 193, 1900 Mich. LEXIS 785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-kidd-mich-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack