Bell v. Woods
ORDER denying without prejudice 16 Motion for Writ of Garnishment; denying without prejudice 18 Motion to Quash. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 9/24/2021. (JWM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
KENNETH D. BELL,
Case No: 5:20-mc-10-JSM-PRL
This case is before the Court for consideration of two motions filed by Defendant
Nathaniel Woods: (1) motion to dissolve writ of garnishment (Doc. 16); and (2) motion to
quash writ of garnishment (Doc. 18). Both motions pertain to the writs of garnishment
recently issued in this case (Docs. 6 & 7). Woods seeks to quash or dissolve the writs and
contends that Plaintiff has no right to enforce them because the foreign judgment in this case
was assigned to another party. (Docs 16 & 18). Woods also asserts a collateral challenge to
the class action judgment that was registered in this Court to initiate this case.
The procedure for dissolution of writs of garnishment is governed by Florida Statutes
§ 77.047. Meanwhile, this case is also governed by this Court’s Local Rules, and Defendant’s
motions lack the certification required by Rule 3.01(g). Local Rule 3.01(g) provides that
“[b]efore filing any motion in a civil action, except a motion for injunctive relief, for judgment
on the pleadings, for summary judgment, or to certify a class, the movant must confer with
the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the motion.” There is no exception for
motions for dissolution of writs of garnishment or for motions to quash a writ of garnishment.
Accordingly, Defendant’s motions (Docs. 16 & 18) are denied without prejudice for
failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g). If Defendant wishes to re-file his motions, he may
do so within 14 days of the entry date of this Order, provided that he has fully complied with
both the letter and spirit of Local Rule 3.01(g).
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on September 24, 2021.
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
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?