Court Opinion

ID: 8344439
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 23:42:21.250065+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:45:44.468706
License: Public Domain

By the Court.
The claim of plaintiff in error is based upon section 6355, Revised Statutes, which is: “All taxes of every description assessed against the assignor upon any personal property held by him before his assignment, shall be paid by the assignee or trustee, out of the proceeds of the property assigned in preference to any other claims against *474the assignor, and every person who shall have performed any labor as an operative in the service of the assignor, shall be entitled to receive out of the trust funds, before the payment of the other creditors, the full amount of the wages due no such person for such labor performed within twelve months preceding the assignment, not exceeding three hundred dollars. But the foregoing provisions shall not prejudice or in any way affect securities given, or liens obtained in good faith, for value, but judgments by confession on warrants of attorney rendered within two months prior to such assignment, or securities given within such time to create a preference among creditors, or to secure a pre-existing debt other than upon real estate for the purchase money thereof, shall be of no force or validity as against such claims for labor to the extent above provided, in case of assignment.”
We agree with the conclusion reached by the circuit court. The applicant is not an “operative” within the meaning of the above section. The judgment of the circuit court will, therefore, be

Affirmed.