United States of America v. Garcia

Filing 28

FINAL ORDER FOR WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT (WAGES) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/13/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 12 Plaintiff and Judgment Creditor, 13 FINAL ORDER FOR WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT (WAGES) v. 14 15 No. 1:15-cv-01077-DAD-BAM JOSE V. GARCIA, (Doc. No. 20) Defendant and Judgment Debtor. 16 17 18 WEST HILLS FUELS, INC., 19 Garnishee. 20 21 22 This matter is before the court on plaintiff United States’ application for a final writ of 23 continuing garnishment (wages) against defendant and judgment debtor Jose Garcia’s non- 24 exempt disposable earnings due to Garcia from garnishee West Hills Fuels, Inc. (“West Hills”). 25 (Doc. No. 20.) As set forth in the plaintiff’s application, the United States sought and obtained 26 the writ to collect the $25,276.40 Garcia owes pursuant to the judgment entered against him by 27 this court on February 25, 2016 and a statutorily authorized litigation surcharge. (See id. at 1.) 28 ///// 1 1 The Clerk of the Court issued the writ, which the United States served on West Hills and Garcia. 2 (See Doc. Nos. 24–25.) 3 West Hills served and filed its acknowledgement of service and answer of garnishee (the 4 “answer”) to the writ, which acknowledged that Garcia was an employee of West Hills and 5 identified his pay. (Doc. No. 26.) Garcia did not file a timely claim of exemption to the proposed 6 garnishment of the wages owed to him by West Hills, did not object to the answer of West Hills, 7 did not request a hearing, and did not otherwise present an objection to the court to the United 8 States’ garnishment action. 9 In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(7), after the garnishee files an answer, and if no 10 hearing is requested with the required time period, the court shall promptly enter an order 11 directing the garnishee as to the disposition of the judgment debtor’s property. Good cause 12 appearing from the review of the court files, the United States’ application for a writ of 13 continuing garnishment (wages) will be granted. 14 Accordingly, 15 1. The United States’ application for a final writ of continuing garnishment (wages) 16 17 (Doc. No. 20) is granted; 2. Garnishee West Hills is ordered to pay at least monthly to the Clerk of the Court, 25 18 percent of defendant Garcia’s disposable wages, earnings, commissions, bonuses, and 19 compensation until: (a) the judgment including interest and surcharge amount of 20 $27,804.04 is paid in full; (b) further order of this Court; or (c) West Hills no longer 21 has custody, possession, or control of any property belonging to defendant; 22 3. Garnishee West Hills is further ordered to provide the United States with written 23 notice if the amount or form of compensation to defendant Garcia changes while this 24 order is in effect or if West Hills no longer has custody, possession, or control of 25 Garcia’s property; 26 4. Within twenty days of the filing of this final order, West Hills shall deliver to the 27 Clerk of the Court all amounts previously withheld by West Hills from and after West 28 Hills received the writ of garnishment on July 1, 2016; and West Hills shall also 2 1 provide the United States a written accounting, by pay period, of the amounts withheld 2 from defendant Garcia’s wages during the period from service of the writ to entry of 3 this final order; and 5. The payment instrument must be made payable to the “Clerk of the Court” and 4 5 delivered to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 501 6 I Street, Suite 4-200, Sacramento, California 95814. Garnishee West Hills shall 7 include this case number (1:15-cv-01077-DAD-BAM) on the payment instrument. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 13, 2016 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?