Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-07-23
COURT DECISIONS.
Notes Of Cases Recently Decided,
Which are of Interest to
Our People
DIGESTED BY W. B. MARTIN.
PORTSMOUTH GAS co. v. S. b. &
RONSAL.
Supreme Court of Appeals OF Virginia
June 10, 1899.

KONSAL.
Supreme Court of Appeals OF Virginia.
June 10, 1899.
CORPORATIONS MAY BE MADE
GARNISHEES, BEING INCLUDED
IN THE WORDS ANY PERSON"
USED IN CODE SECTION 2967.
PUBLIC POLICY DOES NOT EN-
EMpr a MUNICIPAL CORPORA
TION FROM GARNISHMENT.
The points decided sufficiently appear
from the opinion of the court.
The Court says:
The only question involved is the
right of the plaintiff To subject the debt
due from the city of Portsmouth to the
defendants under the provisions of our
attachment law which authorizes gar
niThment proceedings against persons
indebted To nonresident defendants.
Section 1867 OF the Code provides
among other things. how the estate of
a nonresident defendant may be levied
upon under attachment proceedings
and how any person indebted to or hav-
ing in his hands effects of such defend
ant may be summoned as a garnshec.
The words ANY person" used in that
section includes corporations as we'll as
natural persons. In Baltimore and
Graft. Goo. GC5, it was held that when
the word person is used in IL statute.
corpora tiOnS as well as natural persons
are included for civil purposes. This
was the rule at common law. They are
To be deemed ana taken as persons
when the circumstances in which they
are placed are identical with those of
natural persons expressly included in
Such statutes.
Mr. Dillon in his work on Municipal
corporations. while conccding that the
weight of authority is in favor of the
non-iiabiliiy of municipal corporations
10 garnishmcnt, expresses the oDinion
thtt where the Qucs ton is left entirely
op"n by statute. hat on principle IL mu-
ncipal corporption is exempt from Lin =
pity of this character with respect To
us revenues and the salaries OF its off
Gers. but that where it owes an orti-
nary debt Ia a third person. the mere
inconvenience of having To answer ns
EdTlliSnec furnishes no sufficient reason
for Withdrawing it from the reach of
me remedies which the law gives cred
i''fS 81 natural persons and private
corporations.
I'y an act approved February 10. 1895.
express authority is given 10 subject
tie wages aud salaries of the officials.
clerks ana employees Of municipal
corporation ny garnishmcnt where "A
judgment has been rendered against
such official. clerk or omniovc. If If hc
the policy Of the State. rs shown from
TINS act. to make a municipal corpora
ton liable u garnishmcnt upon debts
due It's officials. there would seem To h..
II" good reason for holding thar II
should not he liable to proceeding
where Il owes an ordinary debt to n
third person. unless contrary rule
has been established IN this State We
have no decision upon the precise
point.
ia mnncipal corporation is liable to
ghrnshment in the ordinary case
Where both the execution debtor nnd
me sarnishdc are residents of ,h
state, 1T Is clearly so where The princi-
nai debtor is nonresident of the
state.
In that class Of cases another rule IF
public policy is to be considered. ana
that is tina. the state owes it To iis
own citizens to- provide anuroprlntn
remedies by which home creditors may
:ubJes. the assets or effects of non-rcs-
ldeht debtors To The payment OF their
CENTS The general rule is that n for
cgn personal representative or guar
dian cannot be sued out of the ilris
dicion in which he qualified. because
ms duties arc considered as strictly To-
cal yet. under special circums tanccs.