§ 23. Verdicts. See also ante, § 22 c. II. Persons and property subject. a. In general. ty or credits, and therefore it cannot be summoned as a garnishee in an action 619. a. A verdict upon which no judgment against him. Pease v. Chicago Crayon Co has been entered is not subject to garnish- 18 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1158, 235 Ill. 391, 85 N. E. ment. Cappelli v. Wood, 4 L.R.A. (N.S.) (Annotated) 624, 27 R. I. 411, 62 Atl. 978. (Annotated) b. A mere verdict in a purely tort action is not the subject of garnishment before judgment. Lehmann v. Deuster, 37 L.R.A. 333, 95 Wis. 185, 70 N. W. 170. § 24. Judgments. See also ante, § 22 b. a. A judgment debtor may be garnished for a debt owing the principal defendant. Elson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 43 L.R.A. (N.S.) 531, 154 Iowa, 96, 134 N. W. 547. b. A judgment debtor under a judgment of the supreme court of the state may be garnished in an action in the district court brought by a third person against the judgment creditors. Hardwick v. Harris, L.R.A. 1917D, 1137, 22 N. M. 394, 163 Pac. 253. b. The amount which a shareholder in a co-operative bank doing business under Mass. Pub. Stat. chap. 117, and its amendments, is entitled to withdraw therefrom, made up of dues paid in, plus profits and less fines and losses, may be reached by trustee process. Atwood v. Dumas, 3 L.R.A. 416, 149 Mass. 167, 21 N. E. 236. 28. Stockholder's liability. See also CORPORATIONS, § 298 i. a. The fraudulent assignment of unnaid stock in a corporation will not defeat a garnishment proceeding by corporate creditors to enforce payment so as to give equity jurisdiction of a suit for that purpose. Hall v. Henderson, 63 L.R.A. 673, 134 Ala. 455, 32 So. 840. (Annotated) § 29. Interests under contracts. c. Entry of judgment against the garnishee before proceedings to garnish the claim have commenced makes the indebtedness absolute, within the meaning of Wis. Rev. Stat. § 2769, providing that no julgment shall be rendered upon a liability owing from him to the defendant unless it is due absolutely before judgment against the defendant. Hoven v. West Superior Iron & Steel Co. 32 L.R.A. 388, 93 Wis. 201, 67 N. W. 46. a. A judgment debtor in one state, cannot be held liable as a garnishee in a suit in another state. Elson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 43 L.R.A. (N.S.) 531, 154 Iowa, 96, 134 N. W. 547. b. Where a judgment rendered in one state is satisfied without all the indebtedness having been paid, under an agreement that the defendant is to pay the balance, the remaining obligation is a contract debt and is subject to garnishment in another state. Sutton v. Heinzle, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 238, 84 Kan. 756, 115 Pac. 560, 85 Kan. 332, 116 Pac. 614. § 26. Interest of individual partner in debt due firm. a. The individual interests of a partner in a claim due the firm cannot be reached by garnishment in a court which can acquire no jurisdiction over the partnership or determine the interest of the partner in the claim. Hoaglin v. Henderson, 61 L.R.A. 756, 119 Iowa, 720, 94 N. W. 247. § 27. Interest of stockholder in corporation. See also post, § 65 e; APPEAL AND ERROR, § 339 d. a. A corporation which has issued shares of its stock to a purchaser cannot be said to be indebted to him, or to have in its possession property or effects belonging to him, so far as the interest represented by such shares is concerned, within the men ing of a statute providing for the attachment or garnishment of a debtor's proper a. Renewal commissions due by an insurance company to its general agent under contract are subject to garnishment in the hands of the company in favor of his creditor, although they accrued partly from the efforts of subagents and. under the contract, were payable at his residence in another state. Steer v. Dow, 20 L.R.A. (N.S.) 263, 75 N. H. 95, 71 Atl. 217. (Annotated) § 30. Interests under insurance pol- Exemption of insurance on exempt proper- a. An insurance company may be gar nished for the amount due after a loss, where payment is not conditional on any thing which remains to be done. Ch pman v. Carroll, 25 L.R.A. 305, 53 Kan. 163, 35 Pac. 1109. b. A writ of garnishment will not be effective against an insurer until the condi tions in the policy have been complied with by the insured, or his compliance expressly or impliedly waived by the insurer, under a statute giving a right to garnish "any indebtedness due" to defendant in the hands, pos ession, or control of a third person. West Florida Grocery Co. v. Teutonia F. Ins. Co. L.R.A.1918B, 968, So. 209. - Fla. 77 c. Garnishment will not lie against an insurer until it has exer ised an option given it by the policy to replace or restore the property, under a statute giving the defendant in the hands, posse sion, or conright to garnish "any indebtedne due" to trol of a third person. West Florida Grocery Co. v. Teutonia F. Ins. Co. L.R.A. 1918B, 268, Fla. -. 77 So. 209. d. After the election of an insurer to re build under a policy giving it an option so to do, and the letting of a contract for the work, although the premises were already advertised for sale under a mortgage, the insurer is not liable to garnishment for the II. Persons and property subject. a. In general. amount of the insurance by creditors of the insured. Stone v. Mutual F. Ins. Co. 14 L.R.A. 684, 74 Md. 579, 22 Atl. 1051. e. A fund kept by a foreign insurance company in one state for the payment of losses in that and another state is subject to garnishment at the instance of creditors of an insured in the latter state to the amount of the debt of the company for a loss upon a policy issued in the latter state, although no portion of such fund has been specifically appropriated to such loss, under a statute providing that any credit or other personal property in the possession or under the control of any person, or debts owing the defendant, may be attached. Neufelder v. German-American Ins. Co. 22 L.R.A. 287, 6 Wash. 336, 33 Pac. 870. ance company on a judgment rendered e. A final judgment against an employer for negligently causing the death of an employee is a liability or a debt due to the employer from a casualty insurance combility for damages on account of bodily pany which has insured him against liainjuries, including death, suffered by any ment against the insurance company by the person procuring such judgment. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Peppard, L.R.A.1916Ë, 597, 53 Okla. 515, 157 Pac. 106. § 31. - indemnity policies. a. Under a contract by which an insurer undertakes to indemnify an employer for loss paid because of injury to an employee, there is no obligation on the part of the insurer which can become the sub-employee, which may be reached by garnishject of garnishment in proceedings by an employee to enforce a judgment which he has secured against the insured. Allen v. Etna L. Ins. Co. 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 958, 145 Fed. 881, 76 C. C. A. 265. (Annotated) b. An employee who has a judgment against his employer for injuries may gar nish an insurance company to reach the employer's right of action against it upon an employer's liability policy, where the employer has made an assignment in insolvency before action is begun by the employee. Anoka Lumber Co. v. Fidelity & C. Co. 30 L.R.A. 689, 63 Minn. 286, 65 N. W. 353. c. Where, under a policy insuring against loss by reason of the operation of the assured's automobile, an action is brought against the assured by a person injured by such automobile, and the insurance company thereupon takes sole charge of the defense, right to do under the policy, a judgment in the action against the assured becomes, as between plaintiff, defendant, and the company, a liability or debt owing unconditionally by the company to the assured, which such plaintiff may reach by garnishment. Patterson v. Adan, 48 L.R.A. (N.S.) 184, 119 Minn. 308, 138 N. W. 281. to the exclusion of the assured, as it had the f. An employer's insurance policy, whereby a casualty company agrees to indemnify the insured against loss on account of bodily injuries to employees, and providing that it shall have notice of accidents and shall not be responsible for settlements made es, and assumes exclusive control of the de- a. A common carrier, after acceptance of freight for shipment from a place within the state to a place without, is not required to forego the right to transport the same and receive payment therefor by reason of the service upon it of a garnishee summons in a suit by a third party against the owner of such goods. Baldwin v. Great Northern R. Co. 51 L.R.A. 640, 81 Minn. 247, 83 N. W. 986. cl. One who has insured the owner of an automobile against loss and liability for damages for bodily injuries suffered by any person as the result of an accident caused by the use of the machine, and whose contract provides that no action shall be brought against it unless by the insured for loss b. Property in the hands of a common after judgment by payment in money, is carrier in transit to a place outside of the not subject to garnishment by a person so state is not subject to a garnishment, alinjured if the insured is insolvent, so that though it is yet within the state at the the judgment recovered against him is not time of the service of the garnishee sumcollectable, although the insured, under the mons. Stevenot v. Koch, 28 L.R.A. 600, provisions of the policy, undertook the de- 61 Minn. 104, 63 N. W. 256. (Annotated) fense of the action in which the judgment c. An interstate carrier cannot be garwas recovered. Fidelity & C. Co. v. Mar- nished for property delivered to it for transtin, L.R.A.1917F, 924, 163 Kỵ. 12, 173 S.portation out of the state and delivery to W. 307. the consignor's own order, after the prop d. The liability of an indemnity insur-erty has passed out of the county in which II. Persons and property subject. a. In general. the garnishment is issued, although it is still in the state, and no express exception of it is made from the general operation of the statute. Dart Mfg. Co. v. Carr, L.R.A. 1916E, 449, 174 Iowa, 471, 156 N. W. 714. (Annotated) d. Property not actually within the state, but in course of transportation by a common carrier to a consignee in another state, cannot be reached by process of garnishment served on the carrier within the state. Montrose Pickle Co. v. Dodson & H. Mfg. Co. 2 L.R.A. 417, 76 Iowa, 172, 40 N. W. 705. (Annotated) § 33. Railroad cars. Levy on, see LEVY AND SEIZURE, § 6. a. A railroad car sent loaded with freight from another state into West Virginia, to be returned loaded to the former state, in the transaction of interstate commerce, can ignorant of the contents, if the statute b. The contents of a safety deposit box are not exempt from garnishment in the hands of the company maintaining and renting the right to use it, because it can be opened without injury only by the use of a key in the possession of the customer, if, under the statute, the court has power to direct the forcible opening of the box to secure an examination of its contents. Tillinghast v. Johnson, 41 L.R.A. (N.S.) 764, 34 R. I. 136, 82 Atl, 788. ables of a debtor in its vaults is subject to c. A safe-deposit company having valu garnishment therefor, although it has no access to the contents of the box in which Trow not be levied upon under an attachment in they are kept, under a statute commanding West Virginia, nor will another railroad a garnishee to answer as to the personal company having such cars in its possession property or effects of the defendant in his in the process of carrying on interstate possession or under his control. commerce be liable to garnishment by reabridge v. Spinning, 54 L.R.A. 204, 23 Wash. son of its possession received from another 48, 62 Pac. 125. company against which an attachment has been issued. Wall v. Norfolk & W. R. Co. 64 L.R.A. 501, 52 W. Va. 485, 44 S. E. 294. (Annotated) § 37. Funds of mutual benefit society. a. Funds arising from assessments upon the members of a mutual benefit society, to be used exclusively for the payment of § 34. Freight due on interstate ship-rules of the society, are not subject to atclaims of widows and orphans under the ment. Garnishment of traffic balances due to nonresident interstate railroad company as interference with interstate commerce, see COMMERCE, § 28 e. a. Sums due to a foreign railway carrier from other carriers as the former's share of freight on interstate shipments may be garnished under the state laws, despite the provisions of the interstate commerce act and of U. S. Rev. Stat. § 5258, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3564, securing continuity of transportation. Davis v. Cleveland, C. C. & St. L. R. Co. 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 823, 217 U. S. 157, 54 L. ed. 708, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 463. § 35. Deposits in bank. tachment in the hands of a collector of a subordinate lodge for a general debt of the society; since, if they are the funds of the society, they are impressed with an express trust, and if they are the property of the subordinate lodge until transmitted, they are not subject to attachment for the debts of the general society. Brenizer v. Supreme Council of the Royal Arcanum, 6 L.R.A. (N.S.) 235, 141 N. C. 409, 53 S. E. 835. (Annotated) § 38. Income in hands of trustee. a. Income due a life tenant of a resid ary estate, received by his trustee and treated as principal in the subsequent distribution, and not paid over to him, is liable to garnishment in the hands of the trustees, by a creditor of the legatee. Lawrence v. Security Co. 1 L.R.A. 342, 56 Conn. 423, 15 Atl. 406. $ 39. Salary of public officer. a. Where a general depositor of a bank makes a deposit to his account, and afterwards demands and receives of the bank all of his deposit except a sum equal to the a. The common law rule that salaries, fees, or total of checks previously issued by him, a other compensation due public statement of which checks, he, at the time, and subjected by their creditors to the payofficers or employees could not be reached furnishes the bank, but makes no arrangement of their debts in attachment or garment that such balance is to be a special nishment proceedings, applies only in cases deposit, nor is it accepted by the bank as a where such officers and employees are acspecial deposit, such deposit remains a gentually holding oflice and performing public eral deposit and is subject to attachment. Kaesemeyer v. Smith, 43 L.R.A. (N.S.) 100, 22 Idaho, 1, 123 Pac. 943. b. A special deposit in a bank is subject to garnishment. Lutz v. Williams, L.R.A. 1918A, 76, 79 W. Va. 609, 91 S. E. 460. § 36. Property in safe deposit. a. A safety deposit company may be garnished for the contents of a sealed package in the box of a customer, although it is Asso. v. Awalt, L.R.A.1917F, 1117, 22 N. duties. Southwestern Sav. Loan & Bldg. M. 607, 166 Pac. 1181. b. Salary due a county clerk may, after his term of office has expired, be subjected to garnishment, where the creditor has reduced his demand to judgment. Southwestern Sav. Loan & Bldg. Asso. v. Awalt, L.R.A.1917F, 1117, 22 N. M. 607, 166 Pac 1181. (Annotated) II. Persons and property subject. a. In general. § 40. Future earnings. Injunction against garnishment, see COURTS, Successive garnishments of, see EXEMPTIONS, Injunction against garnishment, see IN- Wilber, 47 L.R.A. 345, 114 Mich. 116, 72 d. A fund in the custody of the law is not subject to garnishment, although the debtor is a nonresident, and the fund is the only one from which the creditor can obtain satisfaction of his debt. Curtis, v. Ford, 10 L.R.A. 529, 78 Tex. 262, 14 S. W. 614. e. Money sued for is not in the custody of the law, so as to be beyond the reach of garnishment, where both suits are in the same jurisdiction. Smith v. Carroll, 12 L.R.A. 301, 17 R. I. 125, 20 Atl. 227. § 43. Money in court. Funds of estate in hands of administrator as money in court, see post, § 52 g. Levy on, see LEVY AND SEIZURE, § 46. See also ante, § 6 b. a. A clerk of court having in his custody, a. A writ of garnishment does not reach salary unearned at the date of service there-as of the custody of the court, moneys which of, as it applies only to property in esse at such date. Humphrey v. Midkiff, 20 L.R.A. (N.S.) 912, 122 La. 939, 48 So. 331. (Annotated) b. A garnishee cannot be penalized for false answers made to interrogatories regarding the amount of salary paid, and the amount of his indebtedness to a judgment debtor, by the rendering of a judgment for a larger amount than that due at the date of service thereof, since unearned salary cannot be reached by anticipation through process of garnishment. Humphrey v. Midkiff, 20 L.R.A.(N.S.) 912, 122 La. 939, 48 So. 331. § 41. Bail deposited by third person. a. Money deposited by a third person with a justice of the peace as bail for one who has been committed by the justice, and which is receipted for to him, is, until the contrary is shown, presumed to belong to such third person, and is not subject to garnishment for the prisoner's debt after latter's discharge. McAlmond Bevington, 53 L.R.A. 597, 23 Wash. 315, 63 the Pac. 251. b. Property in custody of law. V. § 42. Generally. a. Property in custody of the law is not subject to attachment or garnishment. Hudson v. Wilber, 47 L.R.A. 345, 114 Mich. 116, 72 N. W. 162; Boylan v. Hines, 13 L.R.A. (N.S.) 757, 62 W. Va. 486, 59 S. E. 503. have been deposited in a suit and which he holds subject to the orders of the court in such suit, cannot be made a party to independent proceedings either in that court or in any other, to affect the control or disposition of such money. Tuck v. Manning, 5 L.R.A. 666, 150 Mass. 211, 22 N. E. 1001. b. A fund in the hands of the clerk of the court, pending a litigation in regard to its ownership, is not subject to garnishment so long as it remains in the hands of that officer, who is intrusted with its keeping, although the fund is adjudged to belong to the debtor. Curtis v. Ford, 10 L.R.A. 529, 78 Tex. 262, 14 S. W. 614. (Annotated) missioners in a chancery cause, which has c. A fund in the hands of special combeen directed by decree therein to be paid over to a judgment debtor, is subject to garnishment. Boylan v. Hines, 13 L.R.A. (N.S.) 757, 62 W. Va. 486, 59 S. E. 503. (Annotated) d. A distributee's share of money in the custody of a clerk of court after final decree and order of distribution, if nothing remains to be done except to pay over the money, is a "debt" of record and subject to garnishment by a creditor of the distributee, although money in custody of the court cannot, as a general rule, be reached by garnishment. Dunsmoor V. Furstenfeldt & Geinger, 12 L.R.A. 508, 88 Cal. 522, 26 Pac. 518. (Annotated) § 44. surplus on sale under judicial process. a. The surplus of an execution sale left after the judgment is satisfied is subject to garnishment in the hands of the sheriff at the suit of another creditor of the judgment debtor, where the statute provides b. An officer holding property in the cus- that such surplus shall be immediately tody of a court is not liable to garnishment turned over to the defendant, his agent, or in respect thereto in the absence of stat-attorney. Turner v. Gibson, 43 L.R.A. ute authorizing it. Pugh v. Jones, 11 L.R.A. (N.S.) 571, 105 Tex. 488, 151 S. W. 793. (N.S.) 706, 134 Iowa, 746, 112 N. W. 225. (Annotated) c. When property or money is in custodia legis, the officer holding it is the mere hand of the court, and he can make no disposition of it without the consent of his own court, express or implied. Hudson v. b. A balance of the proceeds of a sale of attached perishable property remaining in the hands of the clerk of the court after payment of an execution in favor of the plaintiff cannot be garnished by a creditor II. Persons and property subject. of the defendant, as the clerk continues to be the legal custodian of the money in his official capacity, under control of the court. Allen v. Gerard, 49 L.R.A. 351, 21 R. I. 467, 44 Atl. 592. § 45. Property held under judicial process. a. An officer having custody of property under a levy may be charged as garnishee thereof, so as to create a valid lien thereon subject to his levy. Pitkin & Brooks V. Burnham H. M. & Co. 55 L.R.A. 280, 62 Neb. 385, 87 N. W. 160. § 46. Property taken from person of prisoner. a. An officer may be garnished for money which he has taken from a debtor under arrest where a statute makes property in his hands subject to legal process, if the arrest was made in good faith and there is probable ground for believing the money to be connected with the offense or useful as evidence on the trial of the prisoner. Ex parte Hurn, 13 L.R.A. 120, 92 Ala. 102, 9 So. 515. b. Money and property lawfully taken from a prisoner under arrest is not subject to garnishment in the hands of the sheriff because it is in custody of law. Holker v. Hennessey, 39 L.R.A. 165, 141 Mo. 527, 42 S. W. 1090. c. Money or property unlawfully taken from a prisoner under arrest is not subject to garnishment because a wrongful use of criminal process was made in getting possession of it. Holker v. Hennessey, 39 L.R.A. 165, 141 Mo. 527, 42 S. W. 1090. d. The lien on the estate of a criminal, given to the party injured by Mo. Rev. Stat. 1889, § 4317, does not authorize the garnishment of his property while in the hands of a sheriff who took it from the prisoner while under arrest. Holker v. Hennessey, 39 L.R.A. 165, 141 Mo. 527, 42 S. W. 1090. § 47. Receiver. b. Property in custody of law. § 48. Property in hands of assignee for creditors or trustee in bankruptcy. Under assignment made in other state, see State court to a trustee or assignee in banka. A garnishment will not lie from a ruptcy, to catch dividends which have been declared in favor of certain creditors, or the amount which will be going to them under a composition. Cowart v. W. E. Caldwell Co. 30 L.R.A. (N.S.) 720, 134 Ga. 544, 68 S. E. 500. Fees, see ante, § 4 a. For share of distributee, after delivery of post-dated check therefor, see ante, § 16 b. After assignment by distributee of his interest in estate, see ante, § 17 d. Levy on, see LEVY AND SEIZURE, § 44 e. a. In the absence of a special statute, an executor or administrator cannot, in his official capacity be held liable as a garnishee at the suit of a creditor of the decedent, or one who was a legatee or distributee or other creditor of the estate. Hudson v. Wilber, 47 L.R.A. 345, 114 Mich. 116, 72 N. W. 162. b. Garnishment proceedings will not lie against an executor to reach a debt of the decedent, before a decree for the distribution of the assets in his hands, in the absence of statutory permission, although Appointed in other state, see CONFLICT OF it has been placed in judgment in a suit LAWS, § 109 f. a. Property in the hands of receivers appointed by the court is in custodia legis, and not subject to levy or garnishment. Irwin v. McKechnie, 26 L.R.A. 218, 58 Minn. 145, 59 N. W. 987. b. Receivers and similar officers are liable to garnishment when they have in their hands a definite sum to which the defendant or the judgment debtor is clearly entitled, and the officers have nothing more to do with the funds than to pay them over. Boylan v. Hines, 13 L.R.A. (N.S.) 757, 62 W. Va. 486, 59 S. E. 503. c. An indebtedness incurred by the receivers of a railway company, appointed by the Federal court, while operating the road under the authority of the court, may be garnished in a state court. Kechnie, 26 L.R.A. 218, 58 N. W. 987. Irwin v. MeMinn. 145, 59 revived against the executor. Hudson v. Wilber, 47 L.R.A. 345, 114 Mich. 116, 72 N. W. 162. (Annotated) c. The guardian of a person since deceased, being an officer of the court, cannot be garnished to reach funds to apply on judgments against the ward's heirs and devisees. Pugh v. Jones, 11 L.R.A. (N.S.) 706, 134 Iowa, 746, 112 N. W. 225. c. Situs of debt. (Annotated, § 50. Generally. Judgment rendered in another state, see Penal statute forbidding assigning claim ante, § 25. against wage earner outside of state for collection, see CASE, § 1 yl. Due process as to debt due nonresident, see CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, § 657 b. See also ante, §§ 10 a, 11, 20 b, 29 a; post, § 69 e. |