Legal Question in Credit and Debt Law in California

I have a question regarding wage garnishments in the state of California. If my employer is currently garnishing my wages for a money judgment in a civil case and I am paying less than the full 25% on the garnishment because the creditor agreed to a lesser amount if my employer is served with another wage garnishment on a money judgment in another civil case, can my employer garnishee me for both wage garnishments?

I looked in the California Code of Civil Procedures and found section 706.023 which speaks specifically to multiple wage garnishments being served against me at the same time. The code says "If an earnings withholding order is served while an employer is required to comply with another earnings withholding order with respect to the earnings of the same employee, the subsequent order is ineffective and the employer shall not withhold earnings pursuant to the subsequent order."

I understand that section to mean that my employer can't withhold for the new wage garnishment because I'm currently paying an existing wage garnishment. Does that mean my employer needs to return the new wage garnishment to the levying officer and not honor it at all or does my employer place the new wage garnishment in my payroll file until the current wage garnishment is paid in full and then start withholding for the new wage garnishment? What exactly does "ineffective" mean in this instance?


Asked on 5/27/11, 11:49 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
David Gibbs The Gibbs Law Firm, APC

Ineffective means it is no good. They do not keep it in the file until the first judgment is satisfied, they return it with a statement to the effect that pursuant to 706.023 the order is ineffective. The question I have, and one I cannot answer without doing some paid research, is whether or not they must garnish the balance 25% and pay it over to the second creditor. It seems very unlikely, but I would certainly investigate that question if I were the HR director at your company.

*Due to the limitations of the LawGuru Forums, The Gibbs Law Firm, APC's (the "Firm") participation in responding to questions posted herein does not constitute legal advice, nor legal representation of the person or entity posting a question. No Attorney/Client relationship is or shall be construed to be created hereby. The information provided is general and requires that the poster obtain specific legal advice from an attorney. The poster shall not rely upon the information provided herein as legal advice nor as the basis for making any decisions of legal consequence. As required by 11 U.S.C. �528, we must now disclose that, "We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code. Assistance we provide with respect to Debt Relief may involve bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code."

Read more
Answered on 7/11/11, 4:40 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Credit, Debt and Collections Law questions and answers in California