Nichols v. Schwarz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nichols v. Schwarz

504 So. 2d 503, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 849, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7356

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 25, 1987·No. No. 4-86-0946·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s holding that a continuing writ of garnishment is not available under section 61.12(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1984), for collecting a judgment for arrearages of child support, but is limited in application to ensuring the collectibility of future periodic payments of alimony or child support. See, e.g., Goldstein v. Ginsberg, 399 So.2d 415 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (where husband’s duty to make periodic payments had ended, continuing writ of garnishment was not available).

AFFIRMED.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s holding that a continuing writ of garnishment is not available under section 61.12(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1984), for collecting a judgment for arrearages of child support, but is limited in application to ensuring the collectibility of future periodic payments of alimony or child support. See, e.g., Goldstein v. Ginsberg, 399 So.2d 415 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (where husband’s duty to make periodic payments had ended, continuing writ of garnishment was not available).

AFFIRMED.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

Nichols v. Schwarz, 504 So. 2d 503, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 849, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7356 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

504 So. 2d 503 (Nichols v. Schwarz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related