In Pond v. People, 8 Mich 150, 176 (1860), the defendant requested a no-duty-to-retreat instruction, and the trial court refused the request. The defendant in Pond lived in a fishing community with his wife and children. Id. at 151. The door of the defendant's house faced the door of a net-house, which was about thirty-six feet from the defendant's house and which he also owned. Id. at 151-152. The defendant's two hired men slept in the net-house, a one-room building measuring about sixteen feet by fourteen feet. Id. at 152. On the day before the killing in Pond, three men, including the victim, encountered the defendant while he was away from his home, threatened, and hit him. Id. at 153-154. The defendant escaped, but later, the men came to the defendant's home and his net-house looking for him. Id. at 154. The men did not find the defendant at either place. Id. at 154-155. The next day, the men again threatened the defendant. Id. at 155-156. Later that night, the three men returned to the defendant's net-house and proceeded to tear boards off the roof and wall. Id. at 156. Thereafter, the men went to the defendant's door and demanded that the defendant come outside. Id. at 156-157, 179. The men spoke to the defendant's wife through the door, while the defendant hid under the bed. Id. at 157, 179. At one point, when the defendant's wife slightly opened the door, one of the men squeezed the wife's arm until she fainted. Id. at 157, 180. After the men left, the defendant went to his brother-in-law's house, obtained a gun, and went home. Id. at 158, 180. Later, the three men returned to the defendant's home. When the wife would not open the door, the men went to the defendant's net-house and began to tear it down and assault one of the defendant's hired men, who was sleeping. Id. at 160, 180. The defendant came out of his home, heard his hired man "hallooed" as if he were in pain, and ordered the men to "leave or I'll shoot." Id. at 160, 180-181. The defendant shot and killed one of the three men. Id. at 160-161, 181. At trial, the court instructed the jury on self defense, defense of others, and defense of one's property. Id. at 163-164. The trial court specifically instructed the jury that, if possible, the defendant had the duty to retreat. Id. at 163. The defendant argued that he did not have a duty to retreat because the net-house was part of his dwelling. Id. at 165-167. The court refused to give the instruction because the attack was not on the defendant's dwelling occupied by his wife and children. Id. at 168. On appeal, our Supreme Court noted that a person attacked has a duty to retreat if possible, but that 'a man is not, however, obliged to retreat if assaulted in his dwelling," and may use deadly force to defendant himself, if necessary. Id. at 176-177. The Court also noted: "Human life is not to be lightly disregarded, and the law will not permit it to be destroyed unless upon urgent occasion." Id. at 173. In concluding that the trial court had erred in refusing to give the no-duty-to-retreat instruction requested by the defendant, the Court stated: A question was raised whether the net-house was a dwelling or a part of the dwelling of Pond. We think it was. It was near the other building, and was used not only for preserving nets which were used in the ordinary occupation of Pond, as a fisherman, but also as a permanent dormitory for his servants. Id. at 181.