Search form

Georgia Garnishment Ruling Modified by Judge, No Longer Applies to Wages

By Todd Van Dyke and Justin R. Barnes
  • October 9, 2015

Revising his September 8 decision that Georgia’s garnishment statute is unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Marvin H. Shoob has issued an order stating that his ruling does not apply to wage garnishment cases filed against a judgment debtor’s employer. Strickland v. Alexander, No. 1:12-CV-02735-MHS (N.D. Ga. Oct. 5, 2015).

Judge Shoob’s earlier ruling also enjoined Gwinnett County, where the case arose, from issuing any garnishment summons. Accordingly, the judge modified his injunction on the Gwinnett County Clerk, explicitly stating that his decision does “not apply to continuing wage garnishments filed against a judgment debtor’s employer.”

In response to the judge’s October 6 ruling, the Gwinnett County Clerk issued a directive to the Court for the Clerk’s office to begin issuing wage and support garnishment summons and accept funds sent to the court for wage and support garnishment actions. Other county courts, including Fulton County and Cobb County, had issued similar standing orders to stay garnishment cases following the September 8 ruling. The Fulton County has lifted its standing order to stay garnishment cases and is accepting monetary deposits into its registry.

Employers should continue to garnish as usual, keeping in mind to garnish only monies, such as wages, that are subject to garnishment, until instructed by a court otherwise. Further, employer who were instructed to not send funds or were returned funds due to a court’s prior notice should resend any withheld funds to the courts immediately. If an employer receives a notice from a court regarding how to handle garnishments, the employer should comply with the notice in answering garnishments.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to answer inquiries regarding this and other workplace developments.

©2015 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 23, 2018

Foreign Parent Company is Joint Employer with Subsidiary for Employment Claims, Court Rules

February 23, 2018

A foreign parent company can be held jointly liable for employment claims against its U.S. subsidiary, a federal district court has held. Middlebrooks v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 17-00412 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 1, 2018). The employee brought claims against his former employer, Teva USA, and its parent company, Teva Israel, alleging... Read More

February 20, 2018

Ban-the-Box Laws in Spokane, Washington, and Kansas City, Missouri

February 20, 2018

State and local jurisdictions have continued to consider and enact legislation restricting employers from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal background during the initial stages of the application process. Two of the latest enactments are in Spokane, Washington, and Kansas City, Missouri. Some ban-the-box ordinances are... Read More

February 12, 2018

EEOC: Retaliation Tops Discrimination Charges Filed in Fiscal Year 2017

February 12, 2018

Retaliation was the most common workplace discrimination charge received by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in fiscal year (FY) 2017, according to the agency. (The fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.) Retaliation has been at the top since FY 2010. A total of 84,254 charges were filed with the agency... Read More

Related Practices