Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

KING v. SWEATT

October 20, 1953

KING
v.
SWEATT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: John E. Miller, District Judge.

The questions for determination arise out of the schedule of exemptions filed herein by the defendant and the response of plaintiff to said schedule in which plaintiff asks that the schedule of property filed by defendant be denied and that the property claimed as exempt by defendant be subjected to sale under execution for the collection of a judgment in favor of plaintiff and against the defendant.

On June 26, 1952, this Court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant for a total sum of $4,314.31, with interest thereon at 5% per annum from date of judgment. The judgment has not been paid and an execution has been issued for the collection of the judgment. The United States Marshal has advised the defendant of his intention to levy the execution upon certain real property owned and in the possession of the defendant, and also upon certain personal property alleged to belong to the defendant.

A hearing was had on the schedule submitted by the defendant and on the response of plaintiff thereto, at which time testimony was adduced by both parties. Subsequent to the hearing the parties filed briefs in support of their respective contentions.

The defendant is married, and under the provisions of Article 9, § 2 of the Constitution of the State of Arkansas is entitled to claim as exempt from sale on execution or other process from any court on debt by contract specific articles of personal property to be selected by him, not exceeding in value the sum of $500, in addition to his wearing apparel and that of his family.

Article 9, § 3, supra, provides that the homestead of any resident of Arkansas who is married shall not be subject to the lien of any judgment or to sale under execution or other process except such as may be rendered for certain specified debts.

The judgment upon which the execution has been issued was rendered against defendant for a debt by contract, and the judgment does not come within any of the exceptions set forth in Article 9, § 3, supra.

Article 9, § 4, supra, provides:

    "The homestead outside any city, town or
  village, owned and occupied as a residence, shall
  consist of not exceeding one hundred and sixty
  acres of land, with the improvements thereon, to
  be selected by the owner, provided the same shall
  not exceed in value the sum of twenty-five
  hundred dollars, and in no event shall the
  homestead be reduced to less than eighty acres,
  without regard to value."

Article 9, § 5, supra, provides:

    "The homestead in any city, town or village,
  owned and occupied as a residence, shall consist
  of not exceeding one acre of land, with the
  improvements thereon, to be selected by the
  owner, provided the same shall not exceed in
  value the sum of two thousand five hundred
  dollars, and in no event shall such homestead be
  reduced to less than one-quarter of an acre of
  land, without regard to value."

The testimony adduced at the hearing was undisputed and in summary was as follows:

The defendant is the owner of real property abutting on the east side of United States Highway No. 7 and situated approximately one mile south of the corporate limits of the City of Hot Springs, Arkansas. He acquired a portion of the property, described as lots 1 and 2 of Rosalind Addition to the City of Hot Springs, Arkansas, on November 2, 1948, for a consideration of $30,000. There is situated on this parcel the A-B Tourist Court consisting of eight units and in addition thereto the home occupied by defendant and his wife. The office of the tourist court is in the home. There are approximately 20,000 square feet in this parcel.

Subsequently the defendant purchased another parcel of land immediately south and adjacent to lots 1 and 2. That parcel is described by metes and bounds and is a part of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 17, Township 3 South, Range 19 West, in Garland County, Arkansas. Located on this parcel is a building abutting on the east side of the highway. This is a two-story frame building and is approximately 36 1/2 feet by 36 1/2 feet square. It is rented to a tenant who pays $90 per month therefor. The total area in this particular parcel of property upon which the building, "Furniture Mart," is located is approximately 12,000 square feet. Thus the property of the defendant contains a total ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.