From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cole v. Bank

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Belknap
Jun 1, 1879
59 N.H. 53 (N.H. 1879)

Opinion

Decided June, 1879.

No homestead right exists in land on which there is no dwelling house, and which is not occupied or used, nor intended to be occupied or used, as a home place or part of a home place, although the claimant has no other real estate.

BILL IN EQUITY, for a homestead. The parties agreed upon the following facts for the opinion of the court:

May 28, 1878, the plaintiff, Stephen B. Cole, was the owner of one undivided half of the premises described in the bill, being about sixty acres, part mowing and part wood land; and he had no other real estate. On the above day, the defendants, having an execution against him, caused the same to be levied on said land, subject only to the wife's right of dower. Said land never had any dwelling-house on it, and the petitioners were then residing about three miles away.

Barnard Barnard, for the plaintiffs.

Hibbard, for the defendants.


Upon the facts stated, the bill should be dismissed. The case does not show occupation, use, or intention. It does not appear that the premises are a part of the place of the plaintiffs' home.

Case discharged.

FOSTER, J., did not sit: the others concurred.


Summaries of

Cole v. Bank

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Belknap
Jun 1, 1879
59 N.H. 53 (N.H. 1879)
Case details for

Cole v. Bank

Case Details

Full title:COLE and Wife v. LACONIA SAVINGS BANK

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Belknap

Date published: Jun 1, 1879

Citations

59 N.H. 53 (N.H. 1879)

Citing Cases

Rogers v. Bank

The question whether the land was a part of the home place, is a question of fact that has been determined at…

Nichols v. Nichols

The husband did not abandon his homestead. Buxton v. Dearborn, 46 N.H. 43; Locke V. Rowell, 47 N.H. 46; Cole…