Northwest Sheet Metal Workers Organizational Trust et al v. Crescent Mechanical Inc et al

Filing 2

ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT, signed by Judge Lauren King re 1 Application for Writ of Garnishment, filed by Northwest Sheet Metal Workers Pension Fund, Northwest Sheet Metal Workers Supplemental Pension Trust, No rthwest Sheet Metal Workers Welfare Fund, Sheet Metal Workers Local 66, Northwest Sheet Metal Workers Organizational Trust, Northwest Sheet Metal Labor Management Cooperation Trust, Western Washington Sheet Metal Training Trust. (RE)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NORTHWEST SHEET METAL WORKERS ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST, et al., v. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT CRESCENT MECHANICAL INC., et al., 15 16 Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 2:24-mc-00019-LK v. Defendants, BANK OF AMERICA, Garnishee-Defendant. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Application for Writ of Garnishment. Dkt. No. 1. The Court denies the application without prejudice because the application fails to comply with Chapter 6.27 of the Revised Code of Washington. See Watkins v. Peterson Enters., Inc., 973 P.2d 1037, 1043 (Wash. 1999) (“Garnishment is a statutory remedy that requires strict adherence to the procedures expressly authorized by statute.”). ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT - 1 1 2 3 For example, an affidavit in support of an application for a writ of garnishment must state, among other things, the following facts: 6 [1] the plaintiff has reason to believe, and does believe that the garnishee, stating the garnishee’s name and residence or place of business, is indebted to the defendant in amounts exceeding those exempted from garnishment by any state or federal law, or that the garnishee has possession or control of personal property or effects belonging to the defendant which are not exempted from garnishment by any state or federal law; and [2] whether or not the garnishee is the employer of the judgment debtor. 7 Wash. Rev. Code § 6.27.060(3)–(4). Plaintiffs’ affidavit does not adequately state such facts. See 8 Dkt. No. 1 at 2. In addition, the Court notes that a writ of garnishment directed to a bank that 9 maintains branch offices must “identify either a particular branch of the financial institution or the 10 financial institution as the garnishee defendant.” Wash. Rev. Code § 6.27.080(1). There may be 11 other shortcomings in Plaintiffs’ application, but the Court need not examine it further. 4 5 12 Accordingly, the Court denies the application for a writ without prejudice. Plaintiffs may 13 file an amended application within 14 days of the date of this Order. If the Court does not receive 14 an amended application by that date, it will direct the Clerk to close this matter. 15 16 17 18 Dated this 1st day of April, 2024. A Lauren King United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF GARNISHMENT - 2

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?