This case was a dispute between Canal and Claiborne Streets Railroad Company (the garnishee) and Hart (the plaintiff). Hart had obtained a judgment against the Canal and Claiborne Streets Railroad Company, and sought to garnish the company's assets in order to satisfy the judgment. The company argued that the garnishment was invalid because it was not authorized by the state legislature. The Supreme Court held that the garnishment was valid, and that the state legislature did not have the authority to limit the power of the court to issue garnishments. The Court reasoned that the power to issue garnishments was inherent in the court's power to enforce judgments, and that the state legislature could not limit that power. The Court also held that the company was not entitled to any special protection from garnishment, as it was not a public corporation. The Court concluded that the garnishment was valid, and that Hart was entitled to the assets of the company in order to satisfy the judgment.

In the case of Canal and Claiborne Streets Railroad Company, Garnishee v. Hart, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was contrary to established law. He noted that under Louisiana state law, garnishment proceedings were not considered suits against the debtor but rather actions taken by creditors to recover money owed them from third parties who held funds belonging to debtors. As such, they did not fall within the scope of federal jurisdiction as defined by Congress in 1875 when it passed legislation granting exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving citizens of different states or foreign countries. Furthermore, Justice Field argued that even if this particular garnishment proceeding could be construed as an action between citizens of different states or foreign countries due to its connection with a prior suit brought before a court located outside Louisiana's borders, then it should still have been heard in state court since there was no evidence presented indicating any special circumstances requiring federal intervention.