Reske v. Reske

• Decision Date: 17 October 1883
• Citation: 51 Mich. 541,16 N.W. 895
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: RESKE v. RESKE.

16 N.W. 895

51 Mich. 541

RESKE v. RESKE.

Supreme Court of Michigan

October 17, 1883

A city lot, purchased by a single man in contemplation of his marriage, and with the intention of making it a homestead will be exempt as such from the levy of execution, even before any dwelling is erected on it, if the man and his wife have inclosed, improved, and used it with the constant purpose of making it their home as soon as their means would permit.

Appeal from superior court of Detroit.

C.J Reilly, for defendant.

COOLEY, J.

The bill in this case is filed to protect a homestead right, and to enjoin a threatened sale upon execution. The facts appear to be that in January, 1880, complainant purchased a city lot on the corner of Chene and Morton streets, in Detroit intending to make of it a homestead. He was then a single man, but was anticipating the arrival very shortly of a young woman from Germany whom he was to marry. The woman came on and they were married immediately, according to the previous expectation. Neither of them seems to have had means, but they caused the lot to be fenced, and commenced making use of it in connection with the business of selling wood. A barn and a shed were built, a well was dug, complainant kept his horses on the lot, and also hogs and poultry. Mrs. Reske assisted her husband in his business, and received orders for wood, and wood, to some extent, was piled on the lot for sale. At first, complainant lived with his wife at some considerable distance from the lot, but soon took board across the way, and remained there while building. In the spring of 1881 complainant talked with a builder about the cost of a house, and obtained his figures, but not being able to go on then the matter was left in abeyance. As complainant and his wife earned anything they put it in improvements on the lot; to give his language: "I built every day, as soon as I got a little money ahead." It was towards the end of 1882 before they were able to put up a house, and they were not living in this until January, 1883.

Meantime defendant, on November 28, 1882, had obtained a judgment against complainant for $546.77 and costs, and by virtue of an execution on this judgment had caused levy to be made upon this lot before complainant had commenced building his house and was proceeding to a sale when this bill was filed. The value of the lot, as now improved, is shown to be under $1,500. Defendant, by her...