Tatum v. Zachry

• Decision Date: 19 January 1891
• Citation: 12 S.E. 940,86 Ga. 573
• Parties: TATUM v. ZACHRY et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

12 S.E. 940

86 Ga. 573

TATUM v. ZACHRY et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia

January 19, 1891

Syllabus by the Court.

Debts due by customers to a blacksmith, for work done by him in carrying on an independent business for himself as the proprietor of a blacksmith shop, are not exempt from process of garnishment, under Code, § 3554, such indebtedness not being for the daily, weekly, or monthly wages of a journeyman mechanic or day-laborer, within the meaning of that section.

Error from superior court, Troup county; HARRIS, Judge.

D. J. Gaffney, for plaintiff in error.

H. Strickland, for defendant in error.

SIMMONS, J.

Under the facts in this case, it was not error in the court below to refuse to sanction the writ of certiorari. The evidence shows that Tatum was the proprietor of a blacksmith shop, and not the employe of any one. His customers were garnished on accounts which they owed him, and he claimed that the accounts were exempt from garnishment because he was a day-laborer. While he may have been a day-laborer, he received no wages as an employe, but was his own master; and our Code (section 3554) only exempts the daily, weekly, or monthly wages of journeymen mechanics and day-laborer. A person who carries on an independent business for himself does not come under this section Judgment affirmed.