Case: J. G. SERRAO v. JOSE G. RAMAS; J. R. WILSON, Garnishee
Abbreviation: Serrao v. Ramas
Court: Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii
Jurisdiction: Hawaii
Decision Date: 1898-01-07
Docket Number: 
Citation: 11 Haw. 260
Volume: 11
Reporter: Hawaii Reports
Parties: J. G. SERRAO v. JOSE G. RAMAS; J. R. WILSON, Garnishee.
Pages: 260–261

J. G. SERRAO v. JOSE G. RAMAS; J. R. WILSON, Garnishee.
Appeal ebom District Court, South Hilo..
Submitted December 22, 1897.
Decided January 7, 1898.
Judd, O.J., Erear and Whiting, JJ.
Wages of an employee are not exempt from attachment under the garnishee process, even though .the debtor (employee) has not a dwelling house with over ¡j>250. Civil Laws, p. 566.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY
JUDD, C.J.
The plaintiff obtained judgment against the defendant in the District Court of South Hilo, Hawaii, for $55.80 and costs. Defendant was employed as a day laborer by one J. R. Wilson at the wages of $6 per week. Wilson was summoned as a garnishee and admitted that he owed defendant $5. The court held the garnishee for that amount, and he took an appeal to this court on points of law claiming that as the statute as found on page 566 of the Civil Laws exempted sundry specific articles owned by a house-keeper having a family, from levy and execution, also a houselot not exceeding a quarter of an acre and a dwelling and other buildings thereon not exceeding the value of $250, no attachment by the garnishee process of the wages of such a house-keeper can be made unless the plaintiff shows that the value of the house-keeper’s property is over two hundred and fifty dollars.
We consider this contention unsound. Wages are not by the terms of the statute exempted from attachment, hence they are attachable. Appeal dismissed.
P. Neumann■ for plaintiff.
Q. F. Little for garnishee.