Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. ARK Development/Oceanview, LLC
150 So. 3d 817
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- BB & T obtained a final money judgment against Joseph Kodsi; Amy was not party to the judgment.
- BB & T served four writs of garnishment on Bank of America targeting an account ending 8070; name on account included Amy as owner via power of attorney and ITF designation for Joseph.
- Amy revoked the power-of-attorney and removed Joseph as a beneficiary after garnishment proceedings began.
- Amy filed an affidavit under section 77.16 asserting the funds in account 8070 belonged to her; BB & T objected only to Joseph’s claim of exemption, not alleging fraudulent transfer.
- Amy moved for summary judgment with affidavits and bank documents showing she owned the account and that funds originated from rents and investments held by them as tenants by the entireties.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in Amy’s favor, concluding BB & T could garnish only property exclusively owned by or due to Joseph; it found no evidence showing Joseph’s sole ownership of the funds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Amy owns the 8070 account funds free from BB & T garnishment | Kodsi ownership established by title and account documents | BB & T asserts possible equitable interest or fraudulent transfer by Joseph; funds may belong to Joseph or be derived from his assets | Amy owns the funds; account documents show individual ownership; no evidence of Joseph's exclusive ownership |
| Whether funds in the 8070 account are immune from garnishment as tenancy by the entirety | Funds come from tenancy by the entireties sources; immune from garnishment | No explicit pleading tying funds to jointly owned or entirety-held funds; possible equitable interest remains | Funds deposited as tenants by the entireties are immune; not solely Joseph's funds |
Key Cases Cited
- Ginsberg v. Goldstein, 404 So.2d 1098 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (deposit prima facie belongs to named account holder)
- Green v. Department of Revenue ex rel. Williams, 78 So.3d 555 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (funds presumed to belong to person named on account)
- Antuna v. Dawson, 459 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (tenants by the entireties funds immune from garnishment absent joint debt)
- Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates, 780 So.2d 45 (Fla.2001) (fraudulent transfers addressed by Fraudulent Transfer Act; garnishment not sole remedy)
- Ellis Sarasota Bank and Trust Co. v. Nevins, 409 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (funds in jointly held account originated from debtor's salary; issue was intent of account setup)
- Thomas J. Konrad and Associates, Inc. v. McCoy, 705 So.2d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (creditor must show funds were solely debtor's to justify carve-out in joint accounts)
- Landers v. Milton, 370 So.2d 368 (Fla. 1979) (movant for summary judgment bears initial burden to show no genuine issue)
- Gomez v. Fradin, 41 So.3d 1068 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (review of summary-judgment order is de novo)