Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 77.08 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 77.08 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 77.08 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 77.08

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 77
GARNISHMENT
View Entire Chapter
77.08 Writ; jury trial.On demand of either party a jury summoned from the body of the county shall be impaneled to try the issues.
History.s. 1, ch. 7353, 1917; RGS 3455; CGL 5308; s. 27, ch. 67-254.

F.S. 77.08 on Google Scholar

F.S. 77.08 on CourtListener

Amendments to 77.08


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 77.08

Total Results: 13  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Zelaya/Capital Int'l Judgment, LLC v. John Zelaya, 769 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2014).

Cited 21 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 89 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1960, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20656

...ZC contends that a jury should have determined whether Deutsche Bank was an innocent stakeholder before the district court awarded attorney fees and costs to the bank. ZC’s jury-trial argument has some surface plausibility. Specifically, the Florida statute cited by ZC (Fla. Stat. § 77.08) does provide for jury trials in garnishment actions, see id....
Copy

SEC. Bank v. Bellsouth Adv. & Pub. Corp., 679 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

Cited 19 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1996 WL 410683

...The plaintiff must propound discovery to the garnishee, or subpoena the garnishee to give evidence, in order "to ascertain the correct amount of the garnishee's obligation before entry of final judgment against the garnishee." Id. (footnote omitted). D. BellSouth argues, however, that the judgment is authorized by subsection 77.081(2) of the garnishment statute. We disagree. Subsection 77.081(2) applies only to prejudgment garnishment and has no application to the present case. The statute relied on by BellSouth states: 77.081 Default; Judgment.— (1) If the garnishee fails to answer as required, a default shall be entered against him....
...Under subsection 77.06(1), the garnishee is only liable for debts due by the garnishee to the defendant, and for tangible or intangible personal property of defendant which is in possession of the garnishee. Subsection 77.06(1) by its terms applies to all writs of garnishment. Subsection 77.081(2), relied on by BellSouth, must be read in pari materia with subsection 77.06(1). It follows that in a default situation, the garnishee's liability cannot exceed the amount prescribed by subsection 77.06(1). What, then, is the purpose of subsection 77.081(2)? By its plain words, subsection 77.081(2) applies only to a prejudgment writ of garnishment. [6] The history of subsection 77.081(2) shows that it was drawn from prior statutory provisions dealing exclusively with prejudgment garnishment. [7] There are cases which assume, without discussion, that subsection 77.081(2) applies to post-judgment garnishment, see International Travel Card, Inc....
...Hendricks Enterprises, 371 So.2d 1105, 1106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Hauser v. Dr. Chatelier's Plant Food Co., 350 So.2d at 550, 1 Stephen B. Rakusin, Florida Creditors' Rights Manual § 2.08B.2, at 146 (1995), but there is no indication in those cases that the inapplicability of subsection 77.081(2) was called to the attention of the court. We also conclude that BellSouth misapprehends the problem which subsection 77.081(2) is designed to address....
...intiff expects to recover...." § 77.19, Fla.Stat. When a prejudgment garnishee is holding double the amount which plaintiff seeks, and the prejudgment garnishee defaults, when should judgment be entered against the garnishee, and in what amount? Subsection 77.081(2) supplies the answer....
...covery" default judgment. Notwithstanding *802 that there has been a default, plaintiff can only obtain judgment against the garnishee for the amount of the plaintiff's judgment against the original defendant, plus interest and costs. Id. In sum, subsection 77.081(2) places a cap on plaintiff's recovery where a prejudgment garnishee has withheld amounts that exceed the plaintiff's judgment in the underlying action, plus interest and costs....
...lved here. See West v. West, 534 So.2d 893, 895 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Nevertheless, Bowman continues to accurately state the distinction between liquidated and unliquidated damages. [5] There is a right to jury trial in a garnishment proceeding, § 77.08, Fla.Stat., although there was no jury trial demand in this case. Where there is no disputed issue of material fact, a motion for summary judgment with notice to the defaulting party is, of course, permissible. [6] The first sentence of subsection 77.081(2) states, " On the entry of judgment for plaintiff, a final judgment shall be entered against the garnishee...." Id....
...The third sentence states, "If the claim of the plaintiff is dismissed or judgment is entered against him the default against garnishee shall be vacated...." Id. This circumstance arises only where there is a prejudgment writ of garnishment. [7] Both the Note to section 77.081 of the Florida Statutes, and the annotation to chapter 77 of Florida Statutes Annotated report that section 77.081 is the successor to sections 77.20 and 77.21, Florida Statutes (1965). § 77.081 (Note), Fla.Stat....
...See §§ 77.20,.21, Fla.Stat. (1965). [8] As already indicated, if the garnishee is holding money or property worth less than the plaintiff's underlying judgment, then plaintiff's judgment against garnishee cannot exceed the amount specified by subsection 77.06(1). See also § 77.083, Fla.Stat.; Carpenter v....
...3d DCA 1980), review denied, 397 So.2d 778 (Fla.1981); Keyes Co. v. Sens, 382 So.2d 1273, 1276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Pet Fair, Inc. v. Humane Society of Greater Miami, 583 So.2d 407, 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (emphasis added). [12] This result is consistent with the rationale of section 77.081 which makes the defaulting garnishee liable for the full amount of the plaintiff's claim with interest and costs. True, it is nowhere explicitly stated that section 77.081, which was part of the formerly separate prejudgment interest provisions, is intended to now apply to postjudgment garnishment as well. However, I agree with the cited holdings of the First, Second, and Fourth District Courts of Appeal that section 77.081 applies to postjudgment garnishments....
...Subsection 77.06(1) makes the garnishee liable to the plaintiff for the assets of the garnishment defendant, whatever amount they may be, upon service of the writ. The garnishee's subsequent answer would address the specific amount of assets. The garnishee's refusal to answer compels the conclusion under subsection 77.081(2) that the garnishee holds sufficient assets to cover the full amount of the plaintiff's judgment plus interest and costs. In the case of prejudgment garnishment, the legislature, with section 77.081, had enacted a provision which could, in the case of default, require a prejudgment garnishee bank to pay 100 times or more than the amount the defendant had on deposit....
Copy

Windsor-Thomas Grp., Inc. v. Parker, 782 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Cited 3 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2001 WL 282804

...o not prohibit the garnishee from raising defenses to the writ, including the protection from garnishment provided in section 222.14. The garnishment statute anticipates that the garnishee's answer to the writ may raise issues requiring a trial. See § 77.08, Fla.Stat....
Copy

GLOBE LIFE & ACC. INS. CO. v. Preferred Risk Mut. Ins. Co., 539 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

Cited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 744, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1534, 1989 WL 26760

...set the case for trial. The second part of the Combs test requires that the violation result in a miscarriage of justice. The record at bar discloses that petitioners' request for jury trial *1194 was denied by the trial court, despite the fact that Section 77.08, Florida Statutes (1987), permits a jury trial on the demand of either party....
Copy

Robert C. Malt & Co. v. Colvin, 419 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal

....06(3), Florida Statutes. He chose not to do so at his risk. A judgment creditor who is not satisfied with the garnishee's answer may serve a reply denying the allegations of the answer (Section 77.061) and demanding a jury trial on the issues made (Section 77.08)....
Copy

Cadle Co. v. G & G Assocs., 741 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13198, 1999 WL 816974

call for a full trial or evidentiary hearing. Section 77.08, Florida Statutes (1997), supports this interpretation
Copy

Keith Stansell v. Samark Jose Lopez Bello (11th Cir. 2024).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Argued: Jan 24, 2024

were entitled to a jury trial under Fla. Stat. § 77.08 on whether they USCA11 Case: 22-13798 Document:
Copy

Libberton v. Libberton, 240 So. 2d 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 5596

. See, for example, 9 Fla.Jur., Damages, Section 77; 8 Fla.Jur., Costs, Section 33. . While we purport
Copy

Palm Coast Recovery Corp. v. Carter, 638 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5802, 1994 WL 261415

401 So.2d 1166 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). See also section 77.08, Florida Statutes (1991). The failure to appeal
Copy

Keith Stansell v. UBS Fin. Servs., Inc. (11th Cir. 2022).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

29 impaneled to try the issues.” Fla. Stat. § 77.08. This statute pro- vides a “right to jury trial
Copy

Awbrey v. Newell, 260 So. 2d 281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6967

et seq., F.S.1969, F.S.A., and particularly Section 77.08 thereof. For the foregoing reasons a writ of
Copy

Newell ex rel. Palm Beach Cnty. v. Awbrey, 277 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1973).

Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1973 Fla. LEXIS 4469

et seq., F.S.1969, F.S.A., and particularly Section 77.08 thereof. “For the foregoing reasons a writ of
Copy

Simonetti v. Porter, 731 So. 2d 785 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4909, 1999 WL 218427

trial provisions in the garnishment statute, section 77.08 or 77.16, Florida Statutes (1995). In any event

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.