165 A. 660 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1933
Argued March 7, 1933.
Is compensation paid to an employee under the Workmen's Compensation Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, and deposited in bank, exempt from attachment by a creditor? This question appears not to have been heretofore decided. The answer depends upon the interpretation of section 318 of the act (
Our construction of this section is in harmony with the interpretation placed upon the Act of March 3, 1873, c. 234, § 33, 17 Stat. 576, § 4747 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (38 USCA § 54), by our Supreme Court in Rozellee v. Rhodes,
In the recent case of Spicer v. Smith, decided by the United States Supreme Court on March 13, 1933, the court held that provisions for exemption, etc., relate only to the period prior to the passage of title from the United States to the veteran.
In Surace et al. v. Danna et al.,
We are in entire accord with the learned court below in its conclusion that when payments, under this section of the Workmen's Compensation Act, are paid into the hands of the claimant, the exemption from attachment ceases.
Judgment affirmed. *593