House v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Bowie, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The record shows that the appellant recovered a judgment on the 11th of July, 1810, in the Superior Court of Baltimore City, against one J. V. McNeal, for the sum of $383.01 with interest and costs. On the 31st July, 1815, the appellant issued an attachment, by way of execution on the judgment, which was laid in the hands of the appellee as garnishee, who appeared and pleaded “ nulla bona.” Issue was joined on this plea, and a verdict rendered for the appellee. The question presented by the prayers to the rulings on which the appellant excepted, is whether the Act of 1814, ¹³⁵ ch 45, entitled. ££an Act to repeal sec. 36, Art. 10, Code of Public General Laws, title £ Attachments,’ and re-enact the same,” etc., modifies the Code so as to authorize creditors existing prior to the amending Act, to attach the wages or salaries of employes, not actually due hut falling d.ue after the laying of the attachment in the hands of the employer.

It is contended by the appellant that the proviso in the Act of 1874, ch. 45, declaring nothing therein contained, shall apply to, or in any manner affect, any existing debt, nor prevent any person from issuing an attachment on any judgment now obtained, or which may thereafter be obtained on any existing debts or securities, conferred upon the judgment creditor existing at the time of the passage of the Act, the right to issue an attachment thereon, and thereby bind all the wages of an employe, that may be earned by him from the time the attachment is laid in the hands of the garnishee, to the time of the trial. The appellee insists that the Act of 1874, ch. 45, leaves the creditors then existing to the same remedies by attachment as then in force, unmodified by the amendment. The evidence contained in the bill of exceptions, shows that a judgment was obtained by the appellant against one McNeal, on the 11th of July, 1870, in the Superior Court of Baltimore City, on which an attachment by way of execution was issued on the 31st of July, 1875, and laid in the hands of the appellee as garnishee. It was proved at the trial that McNeal was an employe of the appellee prior to the 31st of July, 1875, and since up to the 1st of June, 1876, at a salary of $125 per month ; and from the first of June, 1876, to the time of the trial, at a salary of $112.50 per month, and had received from the garnishee, on account of his salary, since the date of the attachment, about $1500. ¹³⁶ On cross-examination it was proved that the wages of McNeal, for the month of July, 1875, had been paid before the date of the attachment.

Upon the hypothesis that the jury should find from the evidence that, the appellant was an employe of the appellee,