Case ID: la-ann_36/html/0340-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Fenner, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 9099.
    Emile Droz vs. Parish of East Baton Rouge.
    Rule on Garnishee.
    Garnishment by a judgment creditor of a parish of the parish funds in the bands of the parish treasurer is equivalent to garnishment in the hands of the debtor.
    The taxes and revenues of a municipal corporation cannot be subjected to seizure, either in its treasury or in transit thereto, or evep in the hands of the tax debtors.
    PPEAL from the Seventeenth District Court, Parish of East Baton A Rouge. Sherburn, J.
    
      K. A. Gross for Plaintiff and Appellant.
    
      Geo. W. Buchner for Defendant and Appellee.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Fenner, J.

Plaintiff, a judgment creditor of the parish of East Baton Rouge, issued a writ of fi. fa. and by process of garnishment and interrogatories to the treasurer of the parish, sought to seize, in his hands, the funds of the parish derived from the collection of its taxes and other public revenues.

The xiroceeding is entirely untenable. It is equivalent to a garnishment of the debtor himself. Nothing is better settled than that the taxes and revenues of a municipal eor]ioration cannot be seized, either in the treasury or when in transit to it, or even in the hands of the original debtors thereof, by garnishment or otherwise. Dillon on Municipal Corp. secs. 64, 65; Edgerton vs. Municipality, 1 A. 435; Municipality vs. Hart, 6 A. 570; Railroad Company vs. Municipality, 7 A. 148.

Judgment affirmed, at axqiellant’s cost.