Hartwell v. McDonald
Citations
- 69 Ill. 293
Syllabus
<p>1. Homestead—in vobuntcvry conveyance the title passes subject to the right. It has been held by this court that where the owner of homestead premises conveys the same by deed or mortgage, without releasing the homestead right, the fee in the premises, no matter what their value, passes to the grantee, subject only to the right of occupancy on the part of the grantor; and when such occupancy terminates, the homestead right is annihilated, it not being an estate in the premises which can be transferred as against a former conveyance that has passed the fee.</p> <p>2. Same—distinction between voluntary conveyance and a forced sale. But this court has always made a marked distinction between cases of voluntary conveyance by the homestead occupant, and those of a compulsory conveyance by an officer of the law. It is not the mere homestead right of occupancy which is exempted from levy and forced sale, but it is the lot of ground occupied as a residence to the value of §1000.</p> <p>3. This court has uniformly held that a judgment is not a lien upon homestead premises; that the owner may sell or mortgage the same free from the lien of the judgment, and that no liability can attach to the land in the hands of the purchaser for the previous judgment debt of his grantor.</p> <p>4. Same—effect of judicial sale on title after abandonment. Property is neither subject to a lien, a levy or a forced sale, under judicial process, while occupied as a homestead, and it does not vary the result whether the premises are worth more or less than §1000. If worth not more than that sum the sale is prohibited by the statute, and if worth more, and none of the requirements of the statute have been observed in making .the levy and sale, then the sale is unauthorized and void, and no title passes.</p> <p>5. Same—lien on surplus above value exempted can not be enforced in ejectment. It has been held that, where the homestead premises have been sold under judicial proceedings, in disregard o
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “While the right of fishery upon his own land is exclusively in the riparian proprietor, this does not imply or carry the right to destroy what he does not take.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Sheldon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.