GUARANTY STATE BANK of CHECOTAH v. PRICE

GUARANTY STATE BANK of CHECOTAH v. PRICE
1927 OK 218
258 P. 748
126 Okla. 83
Case Number: 16779
Decided: 07/26/1927
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

GUARANTY STATE BANK of CHECOTAH
v.
PRICE et al.

Syllabus

¶0 1. Homestead--Abandonment by Divorce Where no Minor Children. Where either the husband or wife obtains a divorce, and there are no minor children, it operates as an abandonment of the homestead right.
2. Same--Judgment for Divorced Wife not Sustained.
Record examined, and held, insufficient to support the judgment of the trial court.

Britton H. Tabor, for plaintiff in error.
Turner, Turner, Harley & Parris and S. L. O'Bannon, for defendants in error.

 
HEFNER, J.

¶1 The parties will be referred to herein as they appeared in the district court. It is conceded that the only question presented on appeal was whether or not a certain tract of land, consisting of 40 acres and improvements thereon, was the homestead of Elizabeth Price, one of the defendants. The defendant G. I. Price was the husband of the defendant Elizabeth Price, and she obtained a final decree of divorce from him in May, 1925, subsequent to the institution of this action, but at the time of the trial of the cause she was a single person and there were no minor children. Where the wife without minor children obtains a divorce, does it operate as an abandonment of the homestead right? We think it does. In the case of Trower et al. v. Wetmore,

"Where a husband and wife, without minor children, occupy certain premises as a home for a number of years, title being in the husband, and the wife thereafter leaves the home and husband and obtains a decree of divorce, such divorce operates as an abandonment of the homestead right in such property."

¶2 This states the correct rule. The facts in the case at bar bring it within the rule announced in the above case. When the defendant, Elizabeth Price, divorced her husband, she could not thereafter claim a homestead right in the 40 acre tract of land in controversy. When she obtained her divorce it operated as an abandonment of the homestead right. It is urged that the facts in the case at bar bring it within the rule announced in the case of Greenshaw v. Brown,