Drucker v. Rosenstein

Citations

• 19 Fla. 191

Syllabus

<p>1. A piece of land, never occupied as a dwelling place or home, and incapable of such occupancy, is not a homestead within the meaning of the Constitution and laws of this State.</p> <p>2. The bare fact of filing and recording in the records of the Probate office of the County Judge, a statement in writing, containing a description of the real property claimed to be exempt, and declaring that the same is the homestead of the party in whose behalf such claim is made, under the law (McClellan’s Digest, page ' 531, §11,) does not of itself exempt the land as a homestead from forced sale.</p> <p>3. R. filed and recorded his statement as provided by law, claiming a certain bare and unoccupied lot as his homestead. He then made a contract with a builder to erect upon it a residence for himself and family, caused estimates and specifications and had drawn upon such lot some of the building- material. D. filed a creditor’s bill to subject such lot to the payment of a debt: Held, That inasmuch as the lot was not actually occupied by R. as a homestead, or in a condition to be so occupied, it was not as such exempt under the Constitution and laws.</p> <p>4. The provisions of the homestead laws should be carried out in the liberal and beneficent spirit in which they were enacted, but at the same time great care should be taken to prevent them from becoming the instruments of fraud.</p>