Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 434
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
434 ROGERS v. RRAGLAND. LTerm of
Argument for the defendant in error.
" Pryor v. Stone (19 Texas, 371), it is decided that a city home"
stead may consist of separate lots, although the lots do not
" adjoin each other. The reasons given in those cases apply
C with equal, if not greater force in this case, to the rural home"
The question of homestead or no homestead is a question of
title, upon the death of the husband; and if the fact be that the
property in question is used in the manner and for the purposes
stated by Judge Hemphill, then the title vests, eo instanti,
in the surviving family, without the intervention of any decree
of any court whatever. Any litigation subsequent to this vestiture
in the family concerning it, is, and must be, litigation in
regard to the right-the legal right and title to the property.
This court has said: "An administrator has but little con"
cern with the homestead of the deceased. In no event can it
" be converted to the use of creditors. They have no interest
"' in such property. a * * X The homestead is a unit,
"' clearly defined and distinct from every other portion of the
" estate, and from every other article which is exempt from
" execution. It requires no act of specification to fix its iden"
tity, and therefore vests with or without administration, and
" whether it be or be not set apart by the Chief-Justice." (Sossaman
v. Powell, 21 Texas, 664.)
But it is contended that the claim asserted by the widow and
her children, in this case, is a claim for both an urban and a
rural homestead, and that. this is in contravention of the Constitution.
In reply, we say that the Constitution has nowhere declared
against a mixed character of homestead, and that the reason of
the homestead provision in that instrument, and of the decisions
of this court, allows it.
Admitting, for the moment, all the plaintiffs in error claim
as to the character of lots 0, P, and W, they still come within
the rule in Pryor v. Stone, and Williams v. Hall, so far as that
rule is founded in reason; and reason being the life of the law,
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/442/: accessed September 21, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .