Wright-Dalton-Bell-Anchor Store Co. v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 07 February 1910
• Citation: 125 S.W. 517,142 Mo.App. 50
• Parties: WRIGHT-DALTON-BELL-ANCHOR STORE COMPANY, Respondent, v. ST. LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

125 S.W. 517

142 Mo.App. 50

WRIGHT-DALTON-BELL-ANCHOR STORE COMPANY, Respondent, v. ST. LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Springfield

February 7, 1910

Appeal from Butler Circuit Court.--Hon. J. C. Sheppard, Judge.

Judgment reversed.

James F. Green for appellant.

Any lien against the wages of Sanders which plaintiff acquired by the garnishment proceedings was vacated and annulled by the proceedings in bankruptcy against Sanders. 30 U. S. Statutes at Large, 1897, 1899, 565; In re Goldberg, 121 F 578; In re Kenney, 97 F. 557; In re Reichmann, 91 F. 624; In re Higgins, 97 F. 775; Bear v. Chase, 99 F. 920; Klipstein v. Allen, 136 F 385.

David W. Hill for respondent.

Plaintiff's debt against the defendant was never scheduled in the bankruptcy proceedings and the undisputed evidence is that the plaintiff never had any notice of the bankruptcy proceedings. Therefore, plaintiff's debt was not discharged and the garnishment proceedings never dissolved for the reason that the federal court never acquired jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim or the State court proceedings in relation thereto. Collier on Bankruptcy (4 Ed.), 189; Black v. Blaze, 117 Mass. 17; Platt v. Parker, 6 N.Y.S. 377; Lamb v. Brown, F. Cas. 8011.

OPINION

NIXON, P. J.

This action was commenced on the 11th day of May, 1908, by the respondent filing before a justice of the peace in Butler county a suit upon a promissory note executed by T. A. Sanders and C. C. Hubbs on which the sum of twenty-eight dollars was alleged to be due the plaintiff. On the 27th day of May, 1908, judgment was rendered against the defendant, and on the 11th day of July, 1908, execution was issued on the judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company was summoned as garnishee. The garnishee in due time filed an answer before the justice of the peace admitting that it owed the defendant, T. A. Sanders, sixty-eight and 20-100 dollars as wages due him for the month of June, and alleged that as Sanders was the head of a family and as the money due him was for labor done during the thirty days next preceding, only ten per cent. of the same was subject to garnishment; and it was further alleged that Sanders had been adjudged a bankrupt. On the 21st day of July, 1908, judgment was rendered against the garnishee from which it appealed to the circuit court of Butler county, where the plaintiff again obtained judgment. The case is here on appeal.

Several questions are raised by the record; among others, as to the regularity of the service on the garnishee, and the amount, if any, subject to garnishment by reason of the debtor being the head of a family. From the view that we have taken of the case, it is unnecessary to consider these questions.

I. The controlling questions arising on this record are due to bankruptcy proceedings. It appears that the debtor, T. A. Sanders, was adjudged a bankrupt at Little Rock in the Eastern District of Arkansas under the Acts of Congress relating to bankruptcy on the 16th day of July, 1908, and that he was discharged from bankruptcy on the 6th of April, 1909.

At the trial, there was offered in evidence the schedule that the bankrupt Sanders made at the time he was adjudged a bankrupt. Among the inventory of his debts, as stated in such schedule attention is called to the following item: "Dalton & Bell Co., Poplar Bluff, Mo., $ 30.00," as among the creditors whose claims were unsecured. By this item the garnishee claims that the bankrupt intended to list the plaintiff's judgment against him. It will be perceived that "Dalton & Bell Co.," is not the name of the plaintiff, Wright-Dalton-Bell-Anchor Store Company. No evidence was introduced at the trial in any way tending to modify the statement of the schedule or to show in any way that this item listed as "Dalton & Bell Co.," was identical with the indebtedness of Sanders to the plaintiff or with the judgment of the plaintiff against him. The trial court properly held that the description did not identify it as the plaintiff's judgment, or as the note against Sanders. In the case of Liesum v. Krauss, 35 Misc. (N.Y.) 376, 71 N.Y.S. 1022, the creditor's name was "Liesum" and he was...