109 So. 3d 1128
Ala. Civ. App.2012Background
- Pittman, J. addresses a garnishment appeal by Charles Lee Robbins, Sr. from a Madison County trial court order in SSA garnishment proceedings initiated by Robbins Priddy, the mother.
- The underlying divorce (1988) awarded the mother custody of two children and required the father to pay child support.
- In 1995 the trial court adjudicated $743 in unreimbursed medical expenses but did not change support provisions; support was $750 monthly in 1995, later increasing to $800 until the older child turned 18 in 2002, then $400 until the younger child reached majority in 2004.
- By December 2009 the father owed well over $167,000 in unpaid support plus postjudgment interest, with most payments sparse or none since 1995.
- In 2009 the State attempted to use an administrative income-withholding order (IWO) against SSA because the father was receiving benefits, but the IWO was halted when it was determined the children had reached majority.
- Thereafter, the State pursued garnishment through Form C-21 against SSA, resulting in a sequence of garnishment proceedings (fourth and fifth efforts) that the trial court largely denied or stayed, and no final judgment against SSA had been entered for appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Robbins Sr.'s appeal is premature | Robbins Sr. argues final judgment against SSA is lacking | Priddy argues final judgment exists or will exist on appeal | Appeal premature; no final judgment yet against SSA |
| Whether garnishment of Social Security is appealable before a final judgment | Robbins Sr. contends garnishment of SSA is appealable | Garnishment requires final adjudication between plaintiff and garnishee | Garnishment appeals require final judgment between parties; none exists |
| Whether Ex parte Walters is controlling on garnishment review | Robbins Sr. relies on Walters to allow review | Walters is overruled; Steiner/Edwards govern final-judgment rule | Overruled to extent inconsistent with Steiner Bros. and Edwards; Walters not controlling |
Key Cases Cited
- Steiner Bros. v. First National Bank of Birmingham, 115 Ala. 379 (1897) (final judgments required to support garnishment appeals; defines finality)
- Edwards v. Edwards, 249 Ala. 350 (1947) (garnishment appeals hinge on finality between plaintiff and garnishee)
- Ex parte Walters, 646 So.2d 154 (Ala.Civ.App.1994) (held mandamus to review denial of quash not lying; overruled)