Skip to content

Giblin v. Jordan

Giblin v. Jordan, 6 Cal. 416 (1856)

Court: California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided: July 1, 1856
Judges: Murray
Citations: 6 Cal. 416

Cited by 8

Syllabus

Land held hy a husband with his wife and child, as tenants in common, is not subject to homestead rights under the laws of this State. The parties in such a case are as much tenants in common as though they were entire strangers to each other.

Summary

Appeal from the Superior Court of the city of San Francisco. The agreed statement of the case shows that the plaintiff obtained judgment against the defendant, Michael Jordan, on which execution issued to the sheriff, who levied on the interest of the defendant in a certain lot in the city of San Francisco, which had been purchased several years before in the names of the defendant and Judith his wife, and Anna H. Jordan, their infant child ; that about a year before the rendition of the judgment, Michael Jordan had made a deed of gift of his interest in the lot to his wife; after the levy, and before sale, the defendant claimed the property as a homestead, and tbe sheriff refusing to sell, the case was made by stipulation as upon an application for an order to direct the sheriff to sell, and a counter application to have the homestead set apart. It was admitted that the defendant and his family had resided on the property for a long time before the entry of the judgment. The Court below made an order that the homestead be set aside and and retained by the defendant. Plaintiff appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Murray

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Murray.

Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt concurred.

In Davis & Wolff v. Eleishacker, we decided that land held by tenants in common was not subject to homestead rights under the laws of this State.

In the present ease, the title of the premises is in the husband, his wife, and child, and inasmuch as the husband is the head of the family, *418 and his daughter entitled to claim protection and maintenance from him, it is contended that this case does not fall within the rule established.

We are at a loss to find a distinction. The defendants are as much tenants in common as though they were entire strangers to each other, and the estate of the wife and child cannot be impressed with the character of a homestead simply because they have resided upon the premises.

This case may be a hard one; but it forms no reason why the former decision should be disregarded.

The frequent instances in which Courts have relaxed rules to avoid the consequences of cases like this, have done more to confuse and complicate the law, and destroy its beauty and symmetry, than all other causes put together.

A rule once established and firmly adhered to, may work apparent hardship in a few cases, but in the end will prove more beneficial than if constantly deviated from. Judgment reversed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 8 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

In re Estate of Davidson115 P. 49 (Cal. 1910)
Swan v. Walden103 P. 931 (Cal. 1909)
Kachigian v. Kachigian128 P.2d 865 (Cal. 1942)
McGuire v. Van Pelt55 Ala. 344 (1876)
Schoonover v. Birnbaum83 P. 999 (Cal. 1906)
Rosenthal v. Merced Bank42 P. 640 (Cal. 1895)

Most recent

Kachigian v. Kachigian128 P.2d 865 (Cal. 1942)
In re Estate of Davidson115 P. 49 (Cal. 1910)
Swan v. Walden103 P. 931 (Cal. 1909)
Schoonover v. Birnbaum83 P. 999 (Cal. 1906)
Rosenthal v. Merced Bank42 P. 640 (Cal. 1895)
In re Estate of Carriger40 P. 1032 (Cal. 1895)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.