Case Name: Lillie Morris v. S. E. Brown, as Sheriff, and Chas. Baker
Court: Kansas Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1897-04-30
Citations: 5 Kan. App. 102
Docket Number: No. 186
Parties: Lillie Morris v. S. E. Brown, as Sheriff, and Chas. Baker.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases decided in the Courts of Appeals of the state of Kansas
Volume: 5
Pages: 102–103

Head Matter:
Lillie Morris v. S. E. Brown, as Sheriff, and Chas. Baker.
No. 186.
Judgment Lien — attaches to homestead upon its abandonment. A judgment is a lien upon real estate formerly occupied as a homestead from and after such real estate is abandoned as such homestead.
Error from Brown District Court. Hon. J. F." Thompson, Judge.
Opinion filed April 30, 1897.
Affirmed.
The plaintiff in error brought this action to enjoin the defendant in error Brown, as Sheriff of Brown County, from selling a certain quarter of an acre of land in that county under an execution issued at the instance of the defendant in error, Baker, upon a judgment obtained in the District Court of Brown County by one Susan B. Hill against Elizabeth and John Morris and assigned to him. The case was tried by the court, and findings were made from which it appeared that the judgment was rendered in 1885 ; that Elizabeth and John Morris, the judgment defendants, were husband and wife; that, in 1888, Elizabeth Morris bought the land in controversy, and, with her husband and children, immediately occupied it as a homestead ; but, in 1890, her husband having deceased, she and her children abandoned it and went elsewhere to live; that, May 2, -1892, she deeded the land to her daughter, the plaintiff in error, and that, July 18, 1892, the execution was issued under which the Sheriff was proceeding to sell when this action was begun. The court rendered judgment against the plaintiff in error for costs, and, her motion for a new trial having been overruled, she brought this proceeding in error.
S. L. Ryan, and R. F. Buckles, for plaintiff in error.
Jas. Falloon, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
McElroy, J.
We are of the opinion that the Hill judgment was a lien upon the real estate in question from the time such real estate was abandoned as a homestead by the debtor. The judgment lien, therefore, was and is, superior to the title of the plaintiff, Lillie Morris. Babcock v. Jones, 15 Kan. 296.
It follows, that the trial court committed no error in its conclusions of law, and that it properly overruled the motion for a new trial; and its judgment will be affirmed.