Brandt
Brandt v. Mathew
Opinion
dissent Opinion
Ross, J.
(dissenting). The conclusion reached by the' majority of the court in this case finds support in some of the District Court cases, but is, I think, in direct conflict with the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the case of In *428 re Youngstrom, 153 Fed. 98 , 82 C. C. A. 232 , where that court said, among other things:
I think that reasoning entirely sound, and I therefore dissent from the judgment given here.
lead Opinion
Gilbert, J.
(after stating the facts as above). The petition presents these questions: (1) Is a bankrupt in the state of California entitled to claim a real estate homestead exemption, where neither he nor any one in his behalf has made and recorded a declara *424 tion of homestead prior to his adjudication of bankruptcy? -(2) Assuming that otherwise he would be entitled to claim the homestead, is he precluded by reason of his voluntary conveyance oij the property for the benefit of creditors prior to the petition and adjudication in bankruptcy; the property being subsequently transferred to the trustee?
Sections 1240 and 1241 of the Civil Code of California provide that the homestead is exempt from execution or forced sale, except—
Section 1262 provides:
Section 70a of the Bankruptcy Act provides that the trustee of the bankrupt’s estate shall be vested by operation of law with the title of the bankrupt as of the date he was adjudged a bankrupt, “except in so far as it is to property which is exempt,” and property which prior to the filing of the petition he could by any means have transferred, or which might have been levied upop and sold under judicial process against him.