Harris v. Balk, 198 U.S. 215 (1905) p81.

• Balk, a resident of North Carolina, owed Epstein, a resident of Maryland, $300
• Harris, a resident of North Carolina, owed Balk $180
• While Harris was visiting Maryland, Epstein obtained a writ of attachment "seizing" the debt Harris owed Balk.
• Simultaneously Epstein commenced a garnishment action that sought to order Harris to pay the $180 to Epstein, in partial satisfaction of his claim against Balk.
• Harris did not protest these proceedings.
• Harris paid the judgement to Epstein
• Harris later set up the judgement as a defense when Balk sued Harris in North Carolina for the $180

Balk sued Harris in North Carolina for the $180. Balk objected that the Maryland court had not had jurisdiction to extinguish the debt owed him by Harris. His theory was the situs was in North Carolina.

Did the Maryland court have jurisdiction?

A court can extinguish another's claim on a out of state person if there is a third party that has contact with both states. EX: This holding enabled the Maryland courts to extinguish Balk's claim even though Balk had no contact with Maryland.

The Maryland court did have jurisdiction.

Because Maryland did have jurisdiction, North Carolina must give the Maryland judgement full faith and credit extinguishing Balk's claim. The obligation of a debtor topay his debts goes with him wherever he goes. Therefore the situs is unimportant.