From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cosentino v. Elson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 20, 1972
263 So. 2d 253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Opinion

No. 72-41.

June 20, 1972.

Appeal from Civil Court of Record, Dade County; Leland B. Featherstone, Judge.

Robert J. Ramer, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Heiman Crary and Charles L. Neustein, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.


The order of the trial court, here under review, be and the same is hereby affirmed. Funds in escrow are not subject to garnishment [see: 6 Am.Jur.2d, Attachment and Garnishment, § 125; 28 Am.Jur.2d, Escrow, § 10; 38 C.J.S. Garnishment § 77c(1); Anno. 10 A.L.R. 741] except where all conditions of the escrow had been completed and the funds without dispute are due to a judgment debtor.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Cosentino v. Elson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 20, 1972
263 So. 2d 253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)
Case details for

Cosentino v. Elson

Case Details

Full title:ALFRED A. COSENTINO AND DAVID B. GAM, D/B/A COSENTINO AND GAM, ENGINEERS…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 20, 1972

Citations

263 So. 2d 253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Citing Cases

Nova Insurance Group, Inc. v. Florida Department of Insurance

Cf. Main Ins. Co. v. Bradford, Williams, McKay, Kimbrell, Hamann Jennings, P.A., 369 So.2d 380, 382 (Fla. 3d…

Florida Public Service Commission v. Pruitt, Humphress, Powers & Munroe Advertising Agency, Inc.

At oral argument, counsel for the advertising agency agreed as a matter of law, that funds in an escrow…