
    Peter Kalkes v. Hamilton Storms.
    
      Ejectment — Parties—Husband and wife.
    
    The wife is a necessary party to an action of ejectment to recover possession of premises occupied by her and her husband as a homestead.
    Error to Newaygo. (Palmer, J.)
    Argued October 26, 1892.
    Decided November 18, 1892.
    Ejectment. Plaintiff brings error.
    Affirmed.
    The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
    
      
      A. G. Day, for appellant.
    
      George Luton, for defendant.
   McGrath, C. J.

This is ejectment, brought to recover possession of premises occupied by defendant and his wife for some years as a homestead. The wife was not joined as a defendant. For this and other reasons, which it is not necessary to discuss, the trial judge directed a verdict for defendant.

The case is ruled by Hodson v. Van Fossen, 26 Mich. 68; Henry v. Gregory, 29 Id. 68; Rowe v. Kellogg, 54 Id. 206; Cleaver v. Bigelow, 61 Id. 47; Haddy v. Tobias, 85 Id. 326, — and the judgment is affirmed.

The ‘other Justices concurred.  