23 A.2d 779 | N.J. | 1942
This is a second suit against an employer based on a judgment of $330.97 and costs against an employee of defendant and a statutory execution against that employee's *548
wages served, as claimed, on an officer of the employer. R.S.
2:32-182. No payment having been made, the judgment creditor brought suit as contemplated by R.S. 2:32-183, and recovered judgment against the employer for $126 accrued wages, which was affirmed by this court. Credit Adjusters v. Bergen-EssexConstruction Co.,
We think the status of the "officer" and the service was resjudicata. There was no new service under the second judgment, nor was new service called for by law. By the express language of the statute the original execution in the original suit against the employee was "a lien and continuing levy upon" his wages "until the execution and the expenses are fully satisfied and paid" unless modified by court order. R.S. 2:32-181 and 184. The order being for periodical payments out of wages accruing, a suit could be brought for each unpaid installment as it accrued. This is a second suit against the employer based on the same judgment against the employee, and we have before us in this second suit against the employer the same parties, the same order for execution against wages, the same execution, and the same service on the "officer" of the corporation as in the first suit against the employer. There is no splitting of causes of action, because, *549 as has been said, each accruing installment is a cause of action: but the subject-matter is the same. The only new question in this second case is whether further payments out of wages have accrued; and that is undenied.
The rule of res judicata is not conclusive, it is true, as to questions of law: Bernard v. Hoboken,
The judgment under review will be affirmed. *550