Farmers' State Bank of Belvue v. Weeks

• Decision Date: 11 November 1933
• Docket Number: 31157.
• Citation: 138 Kan. 376,26 P.2d 262
• Parties: FARMERS' STATE BANK OF BELVUE v. WEEKS. [*]
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

26 P.2d 262

138 Kan. 376

FARMERS' STATE BANK OF BELVUE v. WEEKS. ^[*]

No. 31157.

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 11, 1933

Syllabus by the Court.

Evidence held to support finding that farm owned by widow and children was claimed and occupied as homestead, and, therefore, exempt from execution sale.

Mere temporary absence, to educate children, does not constitute abandonment of homestead once established.

That homestead claimant voted at election held in city of her temporary residence where children were attending school held not to defeat homestead right to farm.

1. The proceedings considered in an action to determine whether a farm owned by a widow and children was claimed and occupied as a homestead and exempt from sale on execution upon a judgment for debt, and it is held that the finding that it was a homestead and exempt was supported by sufficient evidence.

2. A homestead once established is not abandoned or lost by a temporary absence such as going to another place to educate children.

3. The fact that the widow voted at an election held in the city of her temporary residence where the children were attending school, does not necessarily defeat the homestead right.

Appeal from District Court, Pottawatomie County; B. C. Pickering Judge pro tem.

Action by the Farmers' State Bank of Belvue against Mrs. J. D Weeks. From the judgment rendered, the plaintiff appeals.

A. E Crane and A. Harry Crane, both of Topeka, and E. C. Brookens E. S. Francis, and H. L. Hart, all of Westmoreland, for appellant.

J. E. Addington and Howard A. Jones, both of Topeka, for appellee.

JOHNSTON Chief Justice.

Was the farm of Mrs. J. D. Weeks, sometimes known as Mabel E. Weeks, comprising 132 acres, occupied by her as a homestead, and therefore exempt from sale upon execution to satisfy a judgment for debt to the Farmers' State Bank of Belvue? The Weeks family lived in the town of Belvue, where Mr. Weeks, the husband, died in 1915. She and her five children continued to live there until 1927 when she went to Topeka, temporarily for the alleged purpose of educating her children. She sold the Belvue property in 1929 and at that time moved some of her furniture and household goods to Topeka where the children attended school, and a substantial part of the same to the farm in question. She took to the farm two beds, a table, stove, and some dishes, and thus as she said moved back to the farm. She rented the farm to her son, Floyd, which he operated up to February, 1932, reserving two rooms in the house for herself and the family. In February, 1932, she let part of the house to Harry Steele, and in leasing it she reserved two of the seven rooms for her occupancy. She also reserved a part of the hay mow and some bins for grain.

There is testimony that she regarded and claimed the farm as her homestead and had only gone to Topeka temporarily to educate her children. That she had gone to the farm at week-ends and when "school was out." As to her occupancy of part of the house, Steele, the tenant, testified that she came to the house occasionally and occupied the reserved rooms, when she prepared her own meals and stayed there while the children were absent in school, and at vacation they too came to the farm. A married daughter testified that she visited her mother at the farm, and also when her boys were there. She spoke of the equipment in the house for living purposes, saying that there were beds, mattresses for them, sheets, quilts, bed spreads, and pillows; that there was a cook stove, oil stove, breakfast table, chairs, rugs, and a cupboard with dishes in it. She also said that her mother was living in the house, and that the children were there at week-ends. On the testimony the trial court held that Mrs. Weeks had claimed and had occupied the farm as a homestead for herself and her children and therefore adjudged that the execution levied on the property be withdrawn and canceled. The facts and circumstances related tend to show that the claim and occupation of the farm as a homestead was made in good faith, and that it had not been abandoned. She was on the farm occasionally, but most of the time she was in Topeka with the children where they attended school and all were on the farm at the time of the trial.

Mrs Weeks owned an undivided half interest with the children in the farm and had the unquestioned right to occupy it as the homestead of the family. If there was a real occupancy under the claim of homestead right, it could not be defeated by a temporary absence from the farm, such as going to another place for the purpose of educating her children. She testified that she intended to live on the farm all the time as soon as the children had finished school, and that she had no other home to which to go saying it...