People's Bank v. Levert
People's Bank v. Levert
Opinion of the Court
Exception was filed to the form of the proceeding, which, it was claimed, should have been by ordinary intervention and citation.
The intervention was for preferred payment out of the proceeds of the prospective sale, and was therefore properly made summary.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- PEOPLE'S BANK v. LEVERT. Intervention of LEVERT et ux.
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- (Syllabus by Editorial Staff.) 1. Homestead (§ 194*) — Sale—Preferences. Upon foreclosure sale of plaintiff’s plantation, on which he and his family resided, plaintiff, if he desire a preference of $2,000 out of the proceeds of the land, as a homestead, may intervene by a third opposition instead of ordinary intervention and citation. [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Homestead, Cent. Dig. § 365; Dec. Dig. § 194.*] 2. Affeal and Error (§ 1036*) — Harmless Error. In an intervention by a husband so as to retain a preference out of the proceeds of the foreclosure sale of the family homestead, the joinder of the wife as a party intervener is harmless. [Ed. Noté. — Eor other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 4069-4074; Dec. Dig. § 1036.*] 3. Homestead (§ 194*) — Foreclosure—Preference. A petition of third opposition by a husband for a homestead preference of $2,000 upon the foreclosure sale of his actual homestead need not deny that his wife has property to that amount. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Homestead, Cent. Dig. § 365; Dec. Dig. § 194.*]