Wilson v. Madison

Decided July 1, 1881

California Supreme Court · decided 1881-07-01

<p>Homestead—Judgment—Attachment—Justice's Coukt.—A homestead was declared after an attachment on the land and a judgment in a Justice’s Court, but no abstract had been filed or recorded in the Recorder’s Office. Held, that at the time of the declaration of homestead, the judgment did not constitute a lien upon the premises within § 1241 of the Civil Code, and a sale under the judgment conveyed no title.</p>

Relies on McCracken v. Harris

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1881-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 1977

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court :

¶1An attachment from a Justice’s Court was levied upon the premises in question October 21st, 1876; judgment was had in the action November 6th, 1876—but no abstract was filed or recorded in the Recorder’s office; the declaration of homestead was made November 10th, 1876; and thereafter proceedings were had for a sale under the Justice’s execution. At the time of the declaration the judgment did not constitute a lien upon the premises within Section 1241, Civil Code, (McCracken v. Harris, 54 Cal. 81; Sullivan v. Hendrickson, id. 258.) The Court found that Hartfield resided on the premises at the time of the declaration, and there was evidence upon which to base the findings.

¶2Judgment and order affirmed.