Any order to withhold income issued and served upon any employer of the obligor pursuant to this article shall have priority over any writ of garnishment or any other state legal process against the same income of the obligor whether the writ of garnishment or other process was served prior or subsequent to the order of income withholding. Any order for income withholding issued pursuant to this article may exceed the statutory maximum amounts prescribed in Section 6-10-7 for garnishment proceedings in Alabama, but such order, including amounts taxed against the obligor as court costs, may not exceed the maximum statutory amounts prescribed under federal law for garnishments issued to enforce support obligations. Provided, if an obligor’s income is subject to more than one withholding order or a current writ of garnishment for child support and a withholding order, the total amounts withheld may not exceed the statutory maximums herein prescribed and the current month’s support payments shall be satisfied before any arrearages are satisfied.
(Acts 1984, No. 84-445, p. 1035, §8; Acts 1985, 2nd Ex. Sess., No. 85-989, p. 338, §8.)
Notes of Decisions
T.K.W. v. State Dep't of Human Resources ex rel. J.B., 119 So. 3d 1187 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013).
· cites it 4× “2003), this court considered the interplay between § 6-10-7 and § 30-3-67, which provides that IWOs have priority over other garnishments and that up to 50% of an obligor’s income may be subject to withholding pursuant to an IWO.”
Alabama Dep't of Corr. v. Merritt, 74 So. 3d 1 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-67 (indicating that an income-withholding order for child support "shall have priority over any writ of garnishment or any other state legal process against the same income of the obligor").”
W.L.S. v. K.S.S.V., 810 So. 2d 777 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “However, under § 30-3-67 “[a]ny order for income withholding issued pursuant to this article may exceed the statutory minimum amounts prescribed in Section 6-10-7 for garnishment proceedings in Alabama .”
McNabb v. State Ex Rel. Rhodes, 890 So. 2d 1038 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003).
· cites it 8× “Specifically, § 30-3-67 provides as follows: “Any order to withhold income issued and served upon any employer of the obligor pursuant to this article shall have priority over any writ of garnishment or any other state legal process against the same income of the obligor whether…”
Crockett v. Dobbs, 545 So. 2d 811 (Ala. Civ. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “The court did hold that section 6-10-7, Code 1975, permitted the imposition of garnishment proceedings to collect a child support arrearage judgment in addition to the wage withholding provisions of section 30-3-67, Code 1975. The garnishment request for fifty percent of the…”
Wls v. Kssv, 810 So. 2d 777 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “However, under § 30-3-67 "[a]ny order for income withholding issued pursuant to this article may exceed the statutory minimum amounts prescribed in Section 6-10-7 for garnishment proceedings in Alabama .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.