Legal Opinion

Waterman S.S. Corporation v. Brill

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided March 17, 1942No. 1 Div. 403PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The question, in essence, for our decision is succinctly stated by able counsel for appellant, in brief: Are the wages of a seaman engaged in the ordinary coastwise trade subject to garnishment?

The ruling of the trial judge upon this question was in the affirmative, hence this appeal by the garnishee (appellant), which had concluded otherwise, ignored a garnishment served upon it, and paid to Seaman Roselle his wages, earned while engaged in his duties in the coastwise trade.

Section 61, 17 Stat. 262, U.S. Shipping Commissioners' Act of June 7, 1872, reenacted and slightly modified by Section…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blackton v. GordonSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Duggar v. Mobile & Gulf Nav. Co.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Johnson v. Standard Oil Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1940
  4. United States ex rel. Boyd v. McMurtryDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1933
  5. Waterman S. S. Corporation v. BrillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1942

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States Steel Corp. v. WoodAlabama Court of Appeals · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API