Deville v. Widoe

• Decision Date: 27 January 1887
• Citation: 31 N.W. 533,64 Mich. 593
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: DEVILLE v. WIDOE.

31 N.W. 533

64 Mich. 593

DEVILLE v. WIDOE.

Supreme Court of Michigan

January 27, 1887

Appeal from Kent. In chancery.

Frank G. Holmes, for complainant.

R.W Powers, (Peter Doran, of counsel,) for defendant and appellant.

SHERWOOD J.

The bill in this case is filed by the complainant and prays that a certain execution levy upon his house and lot, situate in Grand Rapids, may be set aside and declared void, for the reason that at the time of the levy the property consisted of one lot worth less than $1,500, and was his homestead. The case was heard in the Kent circuit, before Hon. ROBERT MONTGOMERY, circuit judge, upon pleadings and proofs, and a decree was made granting the relief prayed.

After a careful inspection of the record, I have no doubt of the correctness of the conclusion reached by the learned circuit judge. The following facts, I think, are sufficiently established by the pleadings and proofs in the case:

The complainant purchased the lot in question, which was then vacant, and which was about 47 feet wide, on Plainfield avenue, of Charles W. Colt, on the twenty-second day of October, 1881. He has never owned any other real estate since. The lot contains about an acre, consisting of part of a platted lot, and was located, when bought, in a thickly-settled district,--residence property mostly on either side of it. When the property was sold to the complainant, the vendor understood it was for a homestead and the complainant purchased it with the intention of making it his homestead, as well as a place upon which he could carry on his business, which was selling meat. He paid $800 for the lot,--paid $200 down, and gave a mortgage upon the property to secure payment of the balance,--and commenced improving the lot November 10th after the purchase. At the time of the purchase he was engaged in carrying on a meat-market on the same street, near the property. His groundlease having expired, he moved the little shop in which he was doing business on to his own lot, placing it about 50 feet back from the street. His plan, however, was to erect a building on the front of his lot sufficiently large and suitable for carrying on his little meat business, and furnish him a comfortable residence for his family; and very soon after taking possession of his lot, in the month of November, he made an unsuccessful effort to raise the money to build such a building. He then decided to erect so much of the building as would be necessary for his business purposes, and in such manner that he could thereafter add thereto the part he had intended for the residence of his family when he could get the necessary means. This he did, and in January following built an ice-house on the lot for the use of his market and family and in November, 1882, built a barn upon the premises for the accommodation of the horse he used in his business. In this condition the complainant used the property during the year 1883, making several efforts, however, during the year, with one or more parties, to negotiate a contract for building the residence in connection with his market as hereinbefore mentioned. He did not succeed in making the arrangement for putting up the addition to his building, which was to constitute the apartments and home for his family, until the month of July, 1884, when he made a contract for the lumber, and dug a cellar for the building. The party who furnished the lumber for the completion of the building commenced delivering it upon the ground on the second day of August, 1884, and the building was completed, and the complainant moved into it, with his family, a few months thereafter. After the building was completed, the assessor valued...