Lawlor v. Harris Tire Co.

Filing 22

ORDER granting 21 Plaintiff's Motion for Writ of Garnishment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 8/30/2016. (AR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
CHAD LAWLOR,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 5:15-cv-135-Oc-30PRL

HARRIS TIRE CO.
Defendant.

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Chad Lawlor’s motion for issuance of a writ of
garnishment directed to Bank of America. (Doc. 21).
On September 3, 2015, the Court entered an amended final judgment in Plaintiff’s favor
against Defendant. (Doc. 15). Plaintiff now moves for a writ of garnishment to satisfy the
outstanding judgment in the amount of $7,065.42, the full amount of which remains due and
owing, plus interest and costs. Plaintiff believes that Bank of America has in its possession goods,
monies, chattel, or effects belonging to Defendant.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 69, the Court must follow state law with regard to garnishment
procedures. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 69. Chapter 77 of the Florida Statutes prescribes the procedure
for issuance and enforcement of writs of garnishment. To obtain a writ of garnishment after
judgment, plaintiff is required to file a motion stating the amount of the judgment. See Fla. Stat.
§ 77.03. Defendant satisfied this requirement.
After a writ of garnishment is issued, Chapter 77 imposes certain notice requirements in
connection with the garnishment proceeding. If a defendant is an individual (which is not the
case here), subsection 77.041(1) requires notice to the defendant and prescribes the exact language

of a “Notice to Defendant of Right against Garnishment of Wages, Money, and Other Property.”1
See Fla. Stat. § 77.041(1).

In addition, subsection 77.041(2) explains plaintiff’s notice

obligations.
Accordingly, upon due consideration, Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 21) is GRANTED, and the
Clerk is directed to issue the Writ of Garnishment to Garnishee Bank of America attached to
Plaintiff’s motion. (Doc. 21, page 2). Plaintiff is reminded that he must fully comply with all
notice requirements of § 77.041, Florida Statutes.
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on August 30, 2016.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Parties

1

The statute uses the term “plaintiff” to describe the party applying for a writ of garnishment, and
the term “defendant” to describe the party whose wages, money, and other property may be garnished. In
this case, however, Defendant obtained a judgment following a motion for sanctions against Plaintiff and
his lawyer, and, thus, the titles of the parties are (somewhat confusingly) reversed. To further complicate
matters, Defendant and Garnishee’s names in this motion are identical.
-2-