Illinois Central Railroad v. Smith
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Pike county. Hon. W. P. Cassedy, Judge. The opinion sufficiently states the facts. The suit in Iowa having been first commenced, and having jurisdiction, takes precedence. The exemption laws do not concern us in this case. Appellant is sued as garnishee of plaintiff’ in another pending suit, and that suit should have the same effect as if pending here.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Pike county. Hon. W. P. Cassedy, Judge. The opinion sufficiently states the facts. The suit in Iowa having been first commenced, and having jurisdiction, takes precedence. The exemption laws do not concern us in this case. Appellant is sued as garnishee of plaintiff’ in another pending suit, and that suit should have the same effect as if pending here. Our courts will give the statute of Iowa the same effect as it has in that state. 7 Cranch, 481; 3 Wheat., 234; 17 Wall., 521. The pendency of a foreign attachment and -garnishment is a good plea in abatement in a case…
1Opinion of the Court
"Woods, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellee is a mechanic, the .head of a family and a resident in this state. He is employed as such mechanic by appellant, in its shops at McComb City, in this state. The debt sued for is wages due from appellant to appellee under such employment. Ry the terms of the contract, made at said McComb City, the wages sued for were payable at that place, and amount to less than one hundred dollars. Under our law, these wages are exempt from garnishment or other legal process. The appellant is a corporation, doing business and resident in this state.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Embree & Collins v. HannaNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Den v. HuffTennessee Supreme Court · 1847
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. DooleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Drake v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. SharittSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Anderson v. CanadaySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. NashSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Ely v. Hartford Life Ins.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
- Southern Pacific Railroad v. LyonMississippi Supreme Court · 1911
- St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. CrewsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.