Barnett Bank of South Florida, N.A. v. American Medical Express Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barnett Bank of South Florida, N.A. v. American Medical Express Corp.

671 So. 2d 819, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3310

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 3, 1996

DocketNos. 95-1432, 95-870

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 671 So. 2d 819 (Barnett Bank of South Florida, N.A. v. American Medical Express Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barnett Bank of South Florida, N.A. v. American Medical Express Corp., 671 So. 2d 819, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3310 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We hold that the trial court properly vacated a garnishment judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(5)¹ because the underlying debt owed by the garnishee to the plaintiff-garnishor’s judgment debtor had been fully satisfied. See § 77.083, Fla.Stat. (1995); First Florida Bank, N.A v. R.D.P. of Naples, Inc., 573 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 2d DCA [820]*8201991); Carpenter v. Benson, 478 So.2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 829 (Fla.1986); United Presidential Life Ins. Co. v. King, 361 So.2d 710 (Fla.1978). See generally Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. v. Davis, 629 So.2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Weitzman v. F.I.F.. Consultants, Inc., 468 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 479 So.2d 117 (Fla.1985). On the cross-appeal, we likewise find no error.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We hold that the trial court properly vacated a garnishment judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(5)¹ because the underlying debt owed by the garnishee to the plaintiff-garnishor’s judgment debtor had been fully satisfied. See § 77.083, Fla.Stat. (1995); First Florida Bank, N.A v. R.D.P. of Naples, Inc., 573 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 2d DCA [820]*8201991); Carpenter v. Benson, 478 So.2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 829 (Fla.1986); United Presidential Life Ins. Co. v. King, 361 So.2d 710 (Fla.1978). See generally Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. v. Davis, 629 So.2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Weitzman v. F.I.F.. Consultants, Inc., 468 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 479 So.2d 117 (Fla.1985). On the cross-appeal, we likewise find no error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

671 So. 2d 819, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-bank-of-south-florida-na-v-american-medical-express-corp-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack