lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
CAMERON v. PICKERING.
A95A2178.
ANDREWS, Judge.
Garnishment. DeKalb State Court. Before Judge Galbaugh, pro hac vice.
Michael Cameron appeals from the state court's order granting Pickering's traverse of Cameron's affidavit for continuing garnishment. Because we find that the state court erred in finding that a restitution order did not constitute a "money judgment" for purposes of a continuing garnishment under OCGA 18-4-110, we reverse.
The order which Cameron appeals states that Cameron sought to garnish Pickering's earnings based on a restitution order for $5,103.45 in a criminal case. The state court found that OCGA 18-4-110 provides for a continuing garnishment where the plaintiff has obtained a "money judgment." Applying rules of strict construction, the court determined that a "restitution order is not the same thing as a 'money judgment.' " Because there was no money judgment, the court granted the traverse.
We find the state court's construction of OCGA 18-4-110 to be excessively narrow. OCGA 17-14-13 (a) states that "a restitution order shall be enforceable as is a civil judgment by execution." Therefore, we find that a restitution order is a money judgment for purposes of continuing garnishment under OCGA 18-4-110. Accordingly, the order of the trial court granting Pickering's traverse to Cameron's affidavit is reversed.
In light of the above holding, we need not address Cameron's remaining enumeration of error.
Charles V. Gandy, Jr., for appellee.
Michael S. Katz, for appellant.
DECIDED JANUARY 19, 1996.
Thursday May 21 05:25 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com