Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.
United States Supreme Court
395 U.S. 337, 89 S. Ct. 1820, 23 L. Ed. 2d 349 (1969)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Family Finance Corporation (FFC) (plaintiff), a collection agency, instituted a wage-garnishment action against Christine Sniadach (defendant), claiming that she owed $420 on a promissory note. In accordance with a Wisconsin statute, FFC simultaneously served a writ of garnishment on Sniadach’s employer. The writ required the employer to withhold a portion of Sniadach’s wages for payment to FFC without there first being any hearing on the merits in which Sniadach could challenge FFC’s collection claim or raise any defenses. Sniadach moved to dismiss the garnishment proceeding on the ground that garnishing her wages without a prior opportunity to be heard violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The trial court denied the motion, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Douglas, J.)
Concurrence (Harlan, J.)
Dissent (Black, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
