USA v. Phillips
Filing
18
MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 14 Motion for Entry of Garnishee Order filed by the United States of America, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 5/21/2012. (mehcd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 09-cv-02939-MSK-MEH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES H. PHILLIPS, JR.,
Defendant,
v.
AFLAC - FIELD COMPENSATION,
Garnishee.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on May 21, 2012.
Pending before the Court is a Motion for Entry of Garnishee Order filed by the United States
of America [filed April 27, 2012; docket #14]. On March 8, 2012, the Clerk of the Court issued a
Writ of Continuing Garnishment to AFLAC-Field Compensation, the Garnishee in this case.
(Docket #12.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(2)(4), the Garnishee was required to “file [its]
original answer with the court... and [to] serve a copy on the debtor and counsel for the United
States.” Although the Garnishee filed its Answer with the Court on April 5, 2012, and sent a copy
of its Answer to the United States Attorney’s Office, the Garnishee provides no indication that the
Answer was served upon Defendant. (Docket #13.)
On May 9, 2012, the Court entered a Minute Order directing the Garnishee to provide proof
of service upon the debtor (Defendant) in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(4) on or before May
18, 2012. (Docket #16.) However, as of this date, the Garnishee has not done so.
In the absence of a duly served Answer under 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c)(2)(4), the Court is not
satisfied that an order should enter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §3205(c)(7). Therefore, the United States’
Motion is denied without prejudice. The United States is granted leave to re-file the Motion once
the Garnishee has provided proof of service upon Defendant.
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?