Opinion
6:21-mc-80-CEM-EJK
07-18-2022
NATIONWIDE JUDGMENT RECOVERY, INC., Plaintiff, v. PELERGE PATEAU, Defendant.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
EMBRY J. KIDD, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Renewed Consent Motions for Final Judgment of Garnishment as to Bank of America, N.A., and Addition Financial Credit Union (the “Motions”). (Docs. 29, 30.) Upon consideration, I respectfully recommend that the Motions be granted.
On April 28, 2021, Matthew E. Orso (“Orso”) as successor trustee to Kenneth D. Bell, registered a foreign judgment in this Court in the amount of $11,136.07 in favor of Bell in his capacity as court-appointed receiver for Rex Venture Group against Defendant Pelerge Pateau. (Docs. 1; 1-1.) The Clerk of Court subsequently issued Writs of Garnishment (the “Writs”) directed to Bank of America, N.A., and Addition Financial Credit Union (the “Garnishees”). (Docs. 5, 16.) Garnishee Bank of America filed an answer to the Writ stating that it is indebted to Pateau in the amount of $1,412.60. (Doc. 9.) Garnishee Addition Financial Credit Union filed an answer to the Writ stating that it is indebted to Pateau in the amount of $1,882.75. (Doc. 20.) Pursuant to Florida Statute § 77.055, Plaintiff served the notice, the Garnishees' Answers, and the Motions for the Writ on Pateau. (Docs. 10, 21.) Thereafter, Plaintiff filed the initial consent motions for final judgment in which Pateau signed his “consent to entry of final judgment of garnishment as set forth in this motion.” (Docs. 23 at 2; 24 at 2.)
On June 10, 2022, Nationwide Judgment Recovery (“Nationwide”), as assignee of Orso, moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(c) to substitute itself for Orso as the party Plaintiff in this matter. (Doc. 27.) The undersigned granted the Motion on June 21, 2022. (Doc. 28.)
Florida's procedure in aid of execution governs in the instant case. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 69. Chapter 77 of the Florida Statutes prescribes the procedure for issuance and enforcement of writs of garnishment. Florida law requires garnishment statutes to be strictly construed. Gigliotti Contracting North, Inc. v. Traffic Control Products of North Florida, Inc., 788 So.2d 1013, 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Bernal v. All Am. Inv. Realty, Inc., No. 05-60956-civ, 2009 WL 586010 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 6, 2009). 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. See Zhejiang Dongri Import & Exp. Co., LTD., v. Neoptx, LLC, No. 20-cv-60114-SMITH/VALLE, 2021 WL 2480879 (S.D. Fla. 2021). Here, Plaintiff has met the statutory requirements for a judgment of garnishment, and, notably, Pateau has consented to the final judgment of garnishment as to both Garnishees. (See Docs. 23, 24.)
Thus, upon consideration of the foregoing, I respectfully recommend that the Court:
1. GRANT the Renewed Consent Motions for Final Judgment of Garnishment (Docs. 29, 30).
2. ENTER final judgment in favor of Nationwide against Bank of America, N.A., in the amount of $1,412.60 plus post judgment interest, and against Addition Financial Credit Union in the amount of $1,882.75 plus post judgment interest, pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 77.083, payable to the attorney trust account of counsel Alison N. Emery.
NOTICE TO PARTIES
The party has fourteen days from the date the party is served a copy of this report to file written objections to this report's proposed findings and recommendations or to seek an extension of the fourteen-day deadline to file written objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A party's failure to file written objections waives that party's right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual finding or legal conclusion the district judge adopts from the Report and Recommendation. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Recommended in Orlando.