The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA,
as assignee and subrogee of
Florida Education Association,
Plaintiff,
v. CASE NO. 3:20-cv-11-MMH-MCR
MILDRED K. GRIFFIS a/k/a
Kelly Griffis,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION1
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Motion of Plaintiff, National
Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, for Final Order of
Judgment of Continuing Garnishment (“Motion”) (Doc. 59), which was
referred to the undersigned for a report and recommendation regarding an
appropriate resolution on March 28, 2023 (Doc. 60). The Motion was served
1 “Within 14 days after being served with a copy of [this Report and
Recommendation], a party may serve and file specific written objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). “A party may
respond to another party’s objections within 14 days after being served with a copy.”
Id. A party’s failure to serve and file specific objections to the proposed findings
and recommendations alters the scope of review by the District Judge and the
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, including waiver of the
right to challenge anything to which no specific objection was made. See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 11th Cir. R. 3-1.
on Defendant and the Garnishee, by first-class mail, on March 27, 2023.
(See Doc. 59 at 4.) To date, no response to the Motion has been filed;
therefore, the Motion will be treated as unopposed. For the reasons that
follow, the undersigned recommends that the Motion be GRANTED.
I. Background
On September 9, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for final
default judgment and directed the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.
(Doc. 26.) The same day, the Clerk entered Judgment in favor of Plaintiff,
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, as assignee and
subrogee of the Florida Education Association, and against Defendant,
Mildred K. Griffis a/k/a Kelly Griffis, for treble damages in the amount of
$220,800.18. (Doc. 27.)
On November 18, 2021, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiff’s
Motion for Issuance of Writ of Garnishment (Doc. 32), and directing the Clerk
of Court to issue the writ attached to that Motion and return it to Plaintiff’s
counsel for service on the Garnishee. (See Doc. 33.) The same day, the
Clerk issued the writ directed to Garnishee Clay County District Schools to
enforce the Judgment in the amount of $220,800.18, entered in favor of
Plaintiff and against Defendant on September 9, 2020. (See Doc. 34.)
On December 13, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Service of Writ on the
School Board of Clay County Florida.2 (See Doc. 35.) The Affidavit of
Service attached to the Notice of Service of Writ provides that a copy of the
Writ of Garnishment and Motion for Issuance of Writ of Garnishment were
served on November 30, 2021 on “L. Clark as Office Staff for Clay County
District Schools.” (Id. at 3.) On December 13, 2021, Plaintiff also filed a
Notice of Service of Garnishee’s Answer, which included, as an attachment,
the Answer of Garnishee, which was furnished to Plaintiff, by U.S. Mail, on
December 9, 2021.3 (Doc. 36.) The Answer of Garnishee was also mailed to
the Clerk of Court for filing by Clay County District Schools and entered as a
separate docket entry on December 13, 2021. (See Docs. 37 & 37-1.)
On April 6, 2022, the Court entered a sua sponte Order, directing
Plaintiff to show cause in writing, on or before April 18, 2022, why the Writ of
Garnishment (Doc. 34) should not be dissolved for Plaintiff’s failure to serve
the requisite documents on Defendant in the manner provided under Chapter
77 of the Florida Statutes. (Doc. 38.) The Court explained:
The docket does not show that Plaintiff has complied with
the notice requirements of Fla. Stat. §§ 77.041 and 77.055. Also,
Defendant is not represented by counsel and does not have access
2 The Certificate of Service stated that the Notice was electronically filed
“with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF which will send notification of such filing(s)
to counsel for the Plaintiff [sic].” (Doc. 35 at 1.)
3 The Certificate of Service stated that the Notice was electronically filed
“with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF which will send notification of such filing(s)
to all parties.” (Doc. 36 at 1.)
to CM/ECF. Thus, Plaintiff has not only failed to serve
Defendant with the documents set forth in Fla. Stat. §§ 77.041
and 77.055, but it has also failed to serve Ms. Griffis with the
Notice of Service of Writ (Doc. 35) and the Notice of Service of
Garnishee’s Answer (Doc. 36), both of which were filed
electronically in this case. In any event, both § 77.041 and §
77.055, Fla. Stat., require service by mail on Defendant
personally, rather than service via CM/ECF, even when
Defendant is represented by counsel. See Art Remedy LLC v.
Lana Moes Art, LLC, No. 18-cv-61912-STRAUSS, 2020 WL
6800449, *1-2 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 19, 2020).
(Doc. 38 at 3-4.)
On April 18, 2022, Plaintiff responded to the Order to Show Cause and
requested that the Writ of Garnishment be dissolved without prejudice.
(Doc. 39.) On April 25, 2022, the Court discharged the Order to Show Cause
and dissolved the Writ of Garnishment without prejudice. (Doc. 40.) On
July 8, 2022, the Court entered an Order, granting Plaintiff’s new Motion for
Issuance of Writ of Garnishment. (Doc. 42.) Pursuant to that Order, on
July 12, 2022, the Clerk issued a Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against
Salary or Wages, directed to Garnishee Clay County District Schools to
enforce the Judgment in the outstanding amount of $220,288.09. (Doc. 43.)
On July 14, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Certificate of Service,
stating that he served on Defendant, by first class mail, copies of (1)
Plaintiff’s Motion for Issuance of Writ of Garnishment; (2) the Order granting
it; and (3) the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages,
which included a Notice to Defendant of Right Against Garnishment of
Wages, Money, and Other Property. (Doc. 44.)
On July 28, 2022, the Garnishee filed an Answer to the Continuing
Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages, stating, in relevant part, that
“the amount which must be paid to the Plaintiff” is $615.30 per pay period.
(Doc. 45 at 3.) On August 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Notice, advising
Defendant that she must move to dissolve the Continuing Writ of
Garnishment Against Salary or Wages within 20 days thereof, if any
allegation in Plaintiff’s Motion for Writ of Garnishment is untrue. (Doc. 47.)
On August 8, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel also filed a Certificate of Service,
stating that he served on Defendant, by first class mail, copies of (1)
Garnishee’s Answer; (2) the Notice advising Defendant that she must move to
dissolve the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages within
20 days of August 8, 2022; and (3) the Certificate of Service. (Doc. 48.)
Then, on October 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Final Order of
Judgment of Continuing Garnishment directed to Garnishee, the School
Board of Clay County Florida (improperly named as Clay County District
Schools), pursuant to Section 77.083 of the Florida Statutes. (Doc. 49 at 1.)
On December 1, 2022, the Court entered an Order, denying without prejudice
Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Order of Judgment of Continuing Garnishment
for failure to provide a timely notice to Defendant pursuant to Section 77.055
of the Florida Statutes. (Doc. 50.)
On January 10, 2023, on Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 51), the Court
dissolved the Continuing Writ of Garnishment without prejudice. (Doc. 52.)
On January 23, 2023, the Court entered an Order, granting Plaintiff’s new
Motion for Issuance of Continuing Writ of Garnishment. (Doc. 54.)
Pursuant to that Order, on January 24, 2023, the Clerk issued a Continuing
Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages, directed to Garnishee Clay
County District Schools to enforce the Judgment in the outstanding amount
of $220,288.09. (Doc. 55.)
On January 25, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Certificate of Service,
stating that on the same day, he served on Defendant, by first class mail,
copies of (1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Issuance of Writ of Garnishment; (2) the
Order granting it; and (3) the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against
Salary or Wages, which included a Notice to Defendant of Right Against
Garnishment of Wages, Money, and Other Property. (Doc. 56.)
On February 14, 2023, the Garnishee filed and served an Answer to the
Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages, stating, in
relevant part, that it employed Defendant and that “the estimated amount
which must be paid” to her per pay period is $435.60. (Doc. 58 at 3.) On
February 16, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Certificate of Service, stating
that on the same day, he served on Defendant, by first class mail, copies of (1)
Garnishee’s Answer; (2) the Notice advising Defendant that she must move to
dissolve the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or Wages within
20 days after the date indicated on the certificate of service in the Notice if
any allegation in Plaintiff’s Motion for Writ of Garnishment is untrue; and (3)
the Certificate of Service. (Doc. 57.)
On March 27, 2023, Plaintiff filed the present Motion seeking final
order of judgment of continuing garnishment directed to Garnishee, the
School Board of Clay County Florida (improperly named as Clay County
District Schools), pursuant to Section 77.083 of the Florida Statutes. (Doc.
59.) Plaintiff states that the sum of $220,288.09 remains due and owning
pursuant to the Judgment entered on September 9, 2020. (Id. at 1.)
Plaintiff further states that although 20 days have passed since service of
Garnishee’s Answer and the requisite notice on Defendant, Defendant has
not moved to dissolve the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary or
Wages, has not objected to it, and has not responded to it in any way. (Id. at
2.) As such, pursuant to Section 77.0305 of the Florida Statutes,4 Plaintiff
4 Section 77.0305 of the Florida Statutes provides, in part:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, if salary or wages
are to be garnished to satisfy a judgment, the court shall issue a
continuing writ of garnishment to the judgment debtor’s employer
which provides for the periodic payment of a portion of the salary or
wages of the judgment debtor as the salary or wages become due until
the judgment is satisfied or until otherwise provided by court order. A
debtor’s status as an employee of the state or its agencies or political
subdivisions does not preclude a judgment creditor’s right to garnish
the debtor’s wages.
requests that final order of judgment of continuing garnishment be entered
against Garnishee, directing Garnishee to garnish the portion of Defendant’s
salary or wages as set forth in the Garnishee’s Answer until the Judgment
against Defendant is satisfied or until the Court orders otherwise. (Id. at 2-
3.)
II. Discussion
Pursuant to Section 77.083 of the Florida Statutes, a judgment shall be
entered against the garnishee based on its answer for the amount of its
liability as disclosed by the answer. Fla. Stat. § 77.083. Any judgment
must not exceed the amount remaining unpaid on the final judgment against
defendant or the amount of the garnishee’s liability to defendant. Id.
“Florida law requires garnishment statutes to be strictly construed.”
Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. v. Nagibina, No. 8:21-mc-131-KKM-JSS,
2022 WL 3636370, *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 3, 2022) (report and recommendation
adopted by 2022 WL 3598303 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 23, 2022)) (citing Gigliotti
Contracting North, Inc. v. Traffic Control Products of N. Fla., Inc., 788 So.2d
1013, 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)). “When a plaintiff demonstrates that
the defendant was served with the statutorily required notices but failed to
appear or otherwise respond to a writ of garnishment, the plaintiff meets the
statutory requirements for a judgment of garnishment.” Nagibina, 2022 WL
3636370, at *1.
As noted above, despite receiving the requisite statutory notices in a
timely manner, Defendant has not responded, objected, filed a claim of
exemption, or moved to dissolve the Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against
Salary or Wages within the 20 days allowed by Fla. Stat. § 77.055.
Therefore, Plaintiff has met the requirements for a judgment of continuing
garnishment against Garnishee. See Nagibina, 2022 WL 3636370, at *1-2
(“When a plaintiff demonstrates that the defendant was served with the
statutorily required notices but failed to appear or otherwise respond to a
writ of garnishment, the plaintiff meets the statutory requirements for a
judgment of garnishment. . . . [N]either Defendant nor any other party has
responded, objected, filed a claim of exemption or moved to dissolve the writ
within the 20 days allowed by § 77.055. Therefore, the court finds that
Plaintiff has met the statutory requirements for a judgment of
garnishment.”); see also Holland v. Westside Sportsbar & Lounge, Inc., No.
6:19-cv-945-CEM-GJK, 2022 WL 2305880, *2 (M.D. Fla. May 13, 2022)
(report and recommendation adopted by 2022 WL 2916812 (M.D. Fla. July
25, 2022)); Papadopoulos v. Sidi, No. 05-22010-CIV-SEITZ/O’SULLIVAN,
2008 WL 11399763, *3 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 8, 2008) (report and recommendation
adopted by 2008 WL 11400736 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 2008)).
Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:
1. The Motion (Doc. 59) be GRANTED.
2. The Clerk of Court be directed to enter final judgment of
continuing garnishment in favor of Plaintiff, National Union Fire Insurance
Company of Pittsburgh, PA, as assignee and subrogee of the Florida
Education Association, and against Garnishee, the School Board of Clay
County Florida Gmproperly named as Clay County District Schools),
directing Garnishee to garnish the portion of Defendant’s salary or wages as
set forth in the Garnishee’s Answer until the Judgment in the outstanding
amount of $220,288.09 against Defendant is satisfied or until the Court
orders otherwise.
DONE AND ENTERED at Jacksonville, Florida, on April 26, 2023.
□ MONTE C. RICHARDSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies to:
The Hon. Marcia Morales Howard
United States District Judge
Counsel of Record
Mildred K. Griffis
5240 Mallard Road
Middleburg, FL 32068
The School Board of Clay County, Florida
900 Walnut Street
Green Cove Springs, FL 320438
10