Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

Mr. Lopez as Judicial Manager for BAICO under Section 77(1)(b) of the Insurance Act, 2005 (the "Bahamas

...Fund, alleging that Gallagher had a "legal duty to direct the fund to follow the requirements of Florida Statutes ... by paying the judgment entered in favor of Dupont against the Tangusso Estate." In Count II, Dupont sought garnishment pursuant to section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2002)....

violations of § 12(2) of the 1933 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77-1(2); and, (iv) Count V, alleging violations of the

...under section 56.29(6) are similar. Both supplementary proceedings and garnishment actions seek to collect on unsatisfied judgments. Compare Fla. Stat. § 56.29(6)(b) (allowing judgment creditor to void transfer of assets by judgment debtor), with id. § 77.01 (“Every person ....

...Because the issue requires this Court to interpret the statutory provisions of Florida garnishment law, we apply a de novo standard of review. See Heart of Adoptions, Inc. v. J.A., 963 So.2d 189, 194 (Fla.2007). In answering the certified question, we first provide an overview of the Florida garnishment statute, sections 77.01-77.28, Florida Statutes (2002). Next, we discuss the proper interpretation of "possession or control" as those terms are used in section 77.01....

...The Garnishment Statute Garnishment is a creature of statute, unknown at common law. Robinson v. Robinson, 154 Fla. 464, 18 So.2d 29, 31 (1944). It is authorized as a method of collecting a monetary judgment against a defendant. In Florida, the right to garnishment is created under section 77.01, which states in relevant part: Every person or entity who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person or entity has a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subje...

...delivered to the payee prior to receipt of the garnishment writ but before presentment of the check to the payor's bank. The specific determination we must make is whether an attorney is in "possession or control" of funds as those terms are used in section 77.01, when a check has been written and delivered to the client but not yet been presented to the attorney's bank for payment....

...Longboat Key Beach Erosion Control District, 604 So.2d 452, 455 (Fla. 1992) (emphasis in original; citations omitted). "Furthermore, construction of a statute which would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result ... should be avoided." State v. Webb, 398 So.2d 820, 824 (Fla.1981). Section 77.01, Florida Statutes, describes the right to garnishment....

...Clayton, of Clayton, Duncan, Johnston, Quincey, Ireland, Felder & Gadd, Gainesville, for appellant. J. Michael Davis, of the Law Offices of Lansing J. Roy, Gainesville, for appellees. HATCHETT, Justice. Appellant attacks the constitutionality of Sections 77.01 and 77.03, Florida Statutes (1975), [1] asserting that these sections are unconstitutional because they fail to provide a garnishee with prior notice and an opportunity to be heard on the issues of whether or not the garnishee in fact holds wages or other monies owing to the garnishment debtor....

...wages. In the present case, the validity of the underlying claim was already established by the court. The federal circuit court in Brown v. Liberty Loan Corp. of Duval, 539 F.2d 1355 (5th Cir.1976), recently upheld the constitutionality of Sections 77.01 and 77.03, Florida Statutes....

...When the trial judge was presented with facts which made it appear inequitable to enforce the final judgment against the garnishee, he should have exercised his discretion and set aside the final judgment pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. Accordingly, we hold Sections 77.01 and 77.03, Florida Statutes, to be constitutional and remand with directions to the trial court to dissolve the default, set aside the final judgment, allow United to answer, and proceed in accordance with this opinion. It is so ordered. OVERTON, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, and KARL, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 77.01, Fla....

...isfy the garnishor's claim against the primary debtor. The garnishment statute applies to a "debt due" from the garnishee to the primary debtor or to "tangible or intangible property" of the primary debtor which is in the hands of the garnishee. See section 77.01, Florida Statutes....

...United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; * * * shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Fla. Stat. § 77.01, F.S.A., reads: "Every person who has sued to recover a debt or has receovered judgment in any court against any person, natural or corporate, has a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subject any debt due...

...alent in effect to that set forth in paragraph (2)." ...... "(c) No court of the United States or any State may make, execute, or enforce any order or process in violation of this section." It is clear that Florida garnishment statutory provisions §§ 77.01 and 77.06, F.S.A., do not contain a limitation on the portion of a person's wages that may be garnished, the only exception being the "head of the family" exemption provided by Fla....

...on the same subject. Therefore, we hold that the federal legislation pertaining to the maximum allowed to be garnished pre-empts our state garnishment provisions not containing such limitation. Specifically, 15 U.S.C. § 1673, pre-empts Fla. Stat. §§ 77.01 and 77.06, F.S.A....

...arnishment law, do not frustrate the effect of the federal legislation. See Hodgson v. Cleveland Municipal Court, 326 F. Supp. 419 (N.D.Ohio, 1971). In conclusion, we hold that 15 U.S.C. § 1673, is a substantive provision and pre-empts Fla. Stat. §§ 77.01 and 77.06, F.S.A., and that the remaining Florida garnishment provisions are not in conflict with the Federal law and therefore valid....

"person purchasing such security from him." 15 U.S.C. § 77(1)(a)(2). 1. Whether Rule 9(b) particularity requirements

...See Fla.Stat.Ann. § 56.061 (West 1998); see also Spradley v. Martin, 897 F.Supp. 560, 566 (M.D.Fla.1995). The proper mechanism for recovering the payments of the U.S. telecommunications carriers is through a Writ of Garnishment. See Fla. Stat.Ann, § 77.01 (West 1998)....

...[9] Plaintiffs have a "right to writ of garnishment `to subject any debt due to defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in possession or control of a third person.'" See Hattaway v. McMillian, 859 F.Supp. 560, 563 (N.D.Fla. 1994), quoting Fla.Stat.Ann. § 77.01 (West 1998)....

...Following a traverse by Florida Steel, the court dissolved the writ of garnishment on the basis that judgment was not a debt subject to garnishment because it had been superseded pending the appeal. Florida Steel appeals this order. Garnishment procedures in Florida are governed by Florida Statutes, Chapter 77. Fla. Stat. § 77.01 (1975) states, in part: "Every person who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person, natural or corporate, has a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subject any de...

...son, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person... ." (Emphasis added.) The final judgment against Spanos was clearly a debt within the meaning of the statutory language of Fla. Stat. § 77.01....

...Validity of the Second Writ “Because the issue requires this Court to interpret the statutory provisions of Florida garnishment law, we apply a de novo standard of review.” Arnold, Matheny & Eagan, P.A. v. First Am. Holdings, Inc., 982 So.2d 628, 632 (Fla.2008). Under section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2013), “[ejvery person or entity who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person or entity has a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subject any debt due to defendant by a third person.......

...te, the transaction was merely voidable by creditors of the corporation and, until the cancellation was voided by judicial determination, it was effective to cancel the debt and appellant had no liability to the corporation. The garnishment statute, section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1979), allows garnishment only of "any debt due to defendant by a third person." Under this statute, a debt, to be subject to garnishment, must be due absolute and without contingency....

...[3] Blatch v. Wesley, 238 So.2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); see Thompson v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. of N.Y., 267 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 271 So.2d 461 (Fla. 1972); 13 Fla.Jur.2d Creditors' Rights and Remedies, §§ 82, 150 (1979). [4] § 77.01, Fla....

accordance with § 12(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77/ (1). The district court, finding the plaintiffs'

...The trial court granted Amy’s motion for summary judgment as to the garnishment of the 8070 account. It found that, because BB & T was a creditor only of Joseph and not of Amy, BB & T was only “entitled to garnish property owned exclusively by or due exclusively to Joseph Kod-si,” relying on section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2013), and Ginsberg v....

...t evidenced by a negotiable instrument that will become due absolutely through the passage of time only to the defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person. § 77.01, Fla....

...is required by Twombly & Ashcroft. The Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts to plausibly demonstrate that HFC lacked probable cause to pursue the garnishment. Neither party disputes the propriety of the judgment in the Main Action. Pursuant to Section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2009), "[e]very person who has ......

...ority. The Florida Supreme Court in Williams v. T. R. Sweat & Co., 103 Fla. 461 , 137 So. 698 (1931) said: “Garnishment * * * should not be pushed in its operation beyond the statutory authority under which it is resorted to.” The statute (F.S. 77.01, F.S.A.) provides: “Every person who * * * shall have recovered a judgment in any court of this state against any person, natural or corporate, shall have a right to a writ of garnishment, * * * to subject any indebtedness due to the defen...

...District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. March 8, 2000. Rehearing denied May 12, 2000. Edward J. Jennings, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant. Thomas R. Shahady and John J. Shahady of Houston Shahady & Beilly, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See §§ 77.01, 77.06, Fla....

...This and other Florida courts apparently impose a duty on a garnishee-maker of a check that was issued in discharge of an obligation to a judgment debtor to stop payment on the check when served with a writ of garnishment. This obligation arises out of an interpretation of the "possession and control" language in section 77.01, Florida Statutes....

...a. Florida law provides a judgment creditor with a right to a writ of garnishment "to subject any debt due to defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person." § 77.01, Fla.Stat....

...Olivieri, Aba’s guarantor, in an unrelated lawsuit. The trial court found that the arbitration award was not subject to garnishment because it was not confirmed. The essential issue on appeal is whether an unconfirmed arbitration award qualifies as a debt due subject to garnishment pursuant to section 77.01, Florida Statutes....

...An unconfirmed award is a contract right that may be used as the basis for a cause of action.” Id. Confirmation merely transforms the arbitral award into a judgment of the court; however, nothing in the garnishment statute mandates transformation of an outstanding debt to a judgment in order to be garnishable. § 77.01, Fla....

...practice and procedure of the state in which the district court is held, existing at the time the remedy is sought, except that any statute of the *201 United States governs to the extent that it is applicable. Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a) (2000). Fla. Stat. § 77.01 provides that "[E]very person who has . . . recovered judgment in any court against any person, natural or corporate, has a right to a writ of garnishment . . .". Fla. Stat. § 77.01 (2000)....

...Garnishment is a statutory remedy in derogation of the common law and is not to be extended beyond the provisions of the statute. Duval County v. Charleston Lumber and Mfg. Co., 45 Fla. 256 , 33 So. 531 , 60 L.R.A. 549 , 3 Ann.Cas. 174 (1903). Garnishment in Florida is provided by Fla.Stat. Chap. 77. Florida Statute § 77.01 F.S.A., provides: “Every person who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person * * * has a right to a writ of garnishment * * [Emphasis supplied] Proceedings in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Dade County are not law suits....

...olds a judgment against the holder of a negotiable note may receive payment of the note by the maker through garnishment. Garnishment is available to subject any debt due to a judgment debtor by a third person to the claims of the judgment creditor. § 77.01, Fla.Stat....

...ummary judgment as to the garnishment of the 8070 account. It found that, because BB&T was a creditor only of Joseph and not of Amy, BB&T was only “entitled to garnish property owned exclusively by or due exclusively to Joseph Kodsi,” relying on section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2013), and Ginsberg v....

...le instrument that will become due absolutely through the passage of time only to the defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person. § 77.01, Fla....

...*1193 We review this issue de novo because we are interpreting Florida’s statutory garnishment law. Arnold, Matheny and Eagan, P.A. v. First Am. Holdings, Inc., 982 So.2d 628, 682 (Fla.2008). Florida law recognizes creditors are entitled to garnish a debtor’s wages to recover unpaid judgments. See § 77.01, Fla....

...imely respond to Pretium’s complaint. See Rule 1.500(a), Fla. R. Civ. P. We also affirm the March 17, 2017 Final Default Judgment in garnishment as to Chase Bank, correctly entered on Pretium’s motion for garnishment after final judgment. See § 77.01, Fla....

...manifest weight-of the evidence and against the clear legal effect of the evidence. The final judgment in garnishment is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to enter a judgment for the garnishor. Reversed and remanded. . See Ma.Stat. § 77.01, F.S.A.; Oper v....

. 15 U.S.C.A. § 77e (West 1981). . Id. at § 77/(1). . Id. at §§ 77q, 77/ (2). . 15 U.S.C.A. §

...Hernandez thereafter hired a succession of attorneys who were unable to collect on the judgment. In 1992, the fourth attorney retained by Hernandez located two bank accounts and a boat valued at $35,000 belonging to appellants. In 1993, pursuant to section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1993), the garnishment *1244 statute, writs of garnishment were served on the two banks and the marina where the boat was located....

...d by a judgment creditor “in connection with execution on a judgment.” Appellants argue that Hernandez is not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees because he did not execute on a judgment. Instead he proceeded under the garnishment statute (§ 77.01) which contains no statutory provision for the recovery of attorneys’ fees by a successful plaintiff against the defendant....

...or partial payment of a real estate commission were equitably owned by the broker to whom the commission was due, [and] ... were ... not subject to garnishment by a judgment creditor of the seller.” General argues, however, that amendments made to section 77.01 and section 77.06(1), Florida Statutes (2002) effectively overruled the decision in Bain. We conclude that the amendments are not relevant to the situation herein. Section 77.01 states, in pertinent part, that a judgment creditor “has a right to a writ of garnishment ......

...ion of the Florida Constitution requires prior notice to a judgment debtor and a hearing before a writ of garnishment may issue.” Id. Because First Union recovered a judgment against the debtors, First Union has the right to a writ of garnishment. § 77.01, Fla....

..., Bonita Springs Golf Course, Ltd. v. Lee County Bank, Case No. 85-528. Apparently, the trial court issued the writs, because subsequently appellants filed a motion to dissolve writs of garnishment. The motion alleged that the writs were contrary to section 77.01, et seq., Florida Statutes (1985), in that there was no judgment against appellants....

protection will not be implied or inferred.4 Section 77.01, Florida Statutes, provides generally for garnishment:

...shee’s indebtedness to the defendant, Sally L. Scogin.” Sally appealed but Buck did not. Sally poses the question of whether a co-defendant who is jointly liable for a judgment can be named as a garnishee under the Florida Garnishment Statute (F.S. 77.01 F.S.A.)....

...Lucie River Co., 78 So.2d 396, 397 (Fla.1955)(stating that the statutory requirements of garnishment “must be strictly complied with”); Zivitz v. Zivitz, 16 So.3d 841, 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (indicating that “strict adherence” to the provisions of the garnishment statute is required). Section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2010), states that “[e]very person or entity who ......

...shment is available “to satisfy a judgment.” “After [the] judgment has been obtained,” to secure the issuance of the writ, a plaintiff must file a motion “stating the amount of the judgment.” § 77.03, Fla. Stat. (2010). Reading sections 77.01, 77.03, and 77.0305 together, it is apparent that, for a post-judgment garnishment, the total amount sought to be garnished must be contained in a judgment that exists prior to the issuance of the writ....

...The garnishment statute applies to a “debt due” from the garnishee to the primary debtor or to “tangible or intangible property” of the primary debtor which is in the hands of the garnishee. Matter of Armando Gerstel, Inc., 43 B.R. 925 (Bankr.S.D.Fl.1984) (quoting Fla.Stat. § 77.01)....

...Pippin’s rights against National Union are derivative. I. National Union correctly asserts that the subject of a writ of garnishment must not be contingent. See Tomlin v. Anderson, 413 So.2d 79 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Florida’s garnishment statute, Section 77.01 Fla.Stat....

...Lang, 17 Utah 2d 10 , 403 P.2d 655 (1965); In re Estate of Brennan, 433 P.2d 512, 516 (Wyo.1967); see also Annotation, Garnishment Against Executor or Administrator by Creditor of Heir, Legatee, Distributee or Creditor of Estate, 59 A.L.R. 768 (1929). We cannot find any basis for appellees’ argument that section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1989) has altered the Post rule....

...assets of the estate, the known debts, and other claims against the estate and their priorities. In effect, the answer shows that at the moment of the answer, the estate was in the midst of probate and there was no “debt” due to appellants. See § 77.01, Fla.Stat....

supplied.) Section 5284, C.G.L., is the same as Section 77.01, Florida Statutes 1953, F.S.A., and provides

...le instrument that will become due absolutely through the passage of time only to the defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person. § 77.01, Fla....

...writs were served, so the Seller’s assignment of its right to receive the insurance payments was not complete. When the writs were served, BCBS and Humana were obligated to remit payment only to the Seller; that obligation was a “debt due” within the meaning of section 77.01, subject to garnishment....

...a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subject any debt due to defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 77.01....

general law relating to garnishment, to-wit, Section 77.01 et seq., F.S.1969, F.S.A., and particularly

...* We have carefully considered those provisions. In our opinion they do not authorize the issuance of a writ of garnishment. We base our conclusion on the language of the aforesaid sections as construed in conjunction with the provisions of the general law relating to garnishment, to-wit, Section 77.01 et seq., F.S.1969, F.S.A., and particularly Section 77.08 thereof....

...at 642-43 . Substantially similar language from the 1845 statute was contained in Revised Statutes, section 1666 (1892), General Statutes, section 2130 (1906), Revised General Statutes, section 3431 (1920), Compiled General Laws, section 5284 (1927), section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1941), and section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1965). In 1967, the legislature changed the wording of section 77.01, to the following: Every person who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person, natural or corporate, has a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter .provided, to subject any debt due to defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person. Ch. 67-254, § 27, at 654-55, Laws of Fla. (emphasis added). It is section 77.01 that creates the right to garnishment. Significantly, the 1967 amendment expanded the scope of garnishment to reach “intangible personal property ... in the possession or control of a third person.” Section 77.01, Florida Statutes (2002) also allows a writ of garnishment to reach such “intangible personal property.” The change in the wording of the garnishment statute from the 1845 version is important to this case because the mod *551 ern v...

...rson,” the only type of intangible property which garnishment could reach at the time Post was decided. The right of a legatee to inherit from an estate is a form of intangible personal property that now falls within the reach of garnishment under section 77.01....

...Section 733.706 is the type of express statute required by Post and Flanary to change the common law rule “that executors are not subject” to garnishment “on account of legacies payable to a debtor.” Post, 19 Fla. at 639 . Finally, the legislature has expanded the scope of section 77.01 to reach intangible personal property such as Gambrill’s interest in her husband’s estate....

...proceed. We recognize that at the time the trial judge ruled, he was bound by Flanary , with which we certify conflict. 1 STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur. . Flanary noted that, ”[w]e cannot find any basis for [the judgment creditor's] argument that section 77.01, Florida Statutes (1989) has altered the Post rule.” 591 So.2d at 310 ....