Wilson E. Palmer, Respondent v. Seymour Van Santvoord, as Receivers of the Walter A. Wood Mowing and Reaping…

Summary

The Court affirmed that Wilson E. Palmer was an employee, operative, and laborer within the meaning of the 1885 statute, and thus his claim for wages was entitled to a preferential claim against the corporation's assets. The majority held that the term “employees” has a broader import than the following words “operatives and laborers” and includes persons who receive wages regardless of whether they are paid a salary. Justice Baetlett dissented, arguing that only those receiving daily wages should be preferred.