Whitehead v. Tapp

Decision Date30 April 1879
Citation69 Mo. 415
PartiesWHITEHEAD v. TAPP, et al., Appellants.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Homestead: HEAD OF A FAMILY.

Any man who has a wife is the head of a family, within the meaning of the homestead act. It does not matter that his wife may have deserted him, and may be residing in another State, and that he may himself be living in improper relations with another woman. ( Brown v. Brown, 68 Mo. 388.)

Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.--HON. S. H. WOODSON, Judge.

Ballingal & Gwynne for appellants.

Milton Moore and A. A. Tomlinson for respondent.

SHERWOOD, C. J.

The controlling question in this case is, whether Arnes was the head of a family. This point is established unmistakably by the evidence that he had a wife living in Quincy, Illinois, who had deserted him for another. This desertion, on the part of the wife, did not, however, sunder the existing marital relations, or make Arnes any the less a housekeeper, or head of a family, than he was prior to that occurrence. The recent case of Brown v. Brown's Admr., 68 Mo. 388, is directly in point. Anterior to the date of obtaining a divorce from his first wife, it was perfectly within Arnes' power to forgive her short comings, and condone her roving fancy; and the mere fact that this never occurred did not alter the status of the parties inter sese. Arnes was still a married man, and consequently the head of a family; being so, evidence that improper relations were maintained between Arnes and the woman who lived in the same house with him, was irrelevant and properly rejected, since the domicile of the husband draws after it that of the wife, and so soon as it became the homestead of the husband, it became, also, the homestead of the wife, and that too, though the wife lived in another State. Thompson on Homesteads, § 259, and cases cited. Under this view, it becomes unnecessary to closely scrutinize the instructions given for plaintiff, or those refused defendants, and we affirm the judgment.

All concur.

AFFIRMED.

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Schulz v. L. E. Whitham & Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1930
    ...months, and had made several efforts to secure a divorce from her. Other authorities also support the conclusion stated by us. Whitehead v. Tapp, 69 Mo. 415; Martin v. Martin, 112 S. C. 400, 100 S. E. 156; Gates v. Steele, 48 Ark. 539, 4 S. W. 53, In the Martin Case, the sole question was w......
  • King v. King
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 27, 1900
    ... ... separate at the time of his death does not destroy her right ... Brown v. Brown, 68 Mo. 388; Whitehead v ... Tapp, 69 Mo. 415; Stokes v. McAllister, 2 Mo ... 163; Mowser v. Mowser, 87 Mo. 437; King v ... King, 64 Mo.App. 301. (2) The widow ... ...
  • Anthony v. Rice
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 9, 1892
    ... ... dower and homestead. Brown v. Brown, 68 Mo. 388; ... Blandy v. Asher, 72 Mo. 27; Hunt v ... Thompson, 61 Mo. 148; Whitehead v. Tapp, 69 Mo ... 415. And she, taking an absolute estate, under the law in ... force in 1873, of course could convey to whom she pleased ... ...
  • Elliot v. Thomas
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 5, 1912
    ...State to use v. Kane, 42 Mo.App. 255; Spengler v. Kaufman, 43 Mo.App. 14; Leake v. King, 85 Mo. 416; Brown v. Brown, 68 Mo. 388; Whitehead v. Tapp, 69 Mo. 415; Beckman v. Meyer, 75 Mo. 333; Fore v. 48 Mo.App. 261. (4) The term "householder" is a broader and more conprehensive term than the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT