When money, choses in action or personal property are garnished and the defendant claims the same, or any part thereof, as exempt, he shall file his claim thereto in writing, verified by oath, in the court in which such proceedings are pending, accompanied by a statement setting forth the personal property, choses in action, and money and the location and value thereof, as required in the statement to be filed under the provisions of Section 6-10-29. Such claim the plaintiff, in person or by his agent or attorney, may contest as in cases of contest after declaration filed, and such contest shall be tried and determined as other contests of claims of exemptions are tried and determined. If the defendant has notice of the garnishment, the claim of exemption must be interposed before judgment of condemnation, but if not, such judgment shall not operate to impair or affect his claim of exemption. Notice of the garnishment must be in writing and may be given by the plaintiff or garnishee, but must be served by the sheriff at least five days before any judgment of condemnation. No claim for exemptions shall exceed the greater of the amounts authorized by the Constitution of 1901, as amended, or required by provisions of federal law.
(Code 1876, §2842; Code 1886, §2533; Code 1896, §2059; Code 1907, §4186; Code 1923, §7908; Code 1940, T. 7, §651; Acts 1988, No. 88-294, p. 454, §2.)
Notes of Decisions
First Nat'l Bank of Jasper v. Robinson (In Re Robinson), 240 B.R. 70 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1999).
· cites it 33× “The modification to Ala.Code § 6-10-37, a provision detailing the procedure for claiming an exemption for money, choses in action, or personal property, was to add “[n]o claim for exemptions shall exceed the greater of the amounts authorized by the Constitution of 1901 as…”
Eight Mile Auto Sales, Inc. v. Fair, 25 So. 3d 459 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “On October 23, 2006, Fair filed a declaration and claim of exemptions, which stated, in pertinent part: “MY PROPERTY is being claimed as exempt pursuant to Article X, § 204, Alabama Constitution of 1901; Alabama Code, § 6-10-6 (1975), as amended; Alabama Code, § 6-10-7; and…”
Finberg v. Sullivan, 634 F.2d 50 (3rd Cir. 1980).
“Ala.Code § 6-10-37. The debtor has the responsibility for claiming his exemptions after garnishment.”
Matter of Lewis, 21 B.R. 926 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1982).
“This principle is embodied in Code of Alabama, 1975, Section 6-10-37 which prescribes not only substantive rights but the procedure for giving the defendant the right to claim his exemptions at any time *929 after notice of garnishment, prior to the judgment of condemnation…”
Ex Parte Avery, 514 So. 2d 1380 (Ala. 1987).
“Such specific legislative enactment is found in Code of Alabama (1975), § 6-10-37, which allows for the claiming of exemptions in the garnishment contest.”
Sink v. Advanced Collection Servs., Inc., 607 So. 2d 246 (Ala. Civ. App. 1992).
· cites it 5× ““Although Roberts very strenuously argues for the allowance of both the constitutional exemption and the seventy-five percent exemption as to wages, we do not agree that he has correctly interpreted § 6-10-37, which we find to be controlling here.”
Alabama Telco Credit Union v. Gibbons, 195 So. 3d 1012 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015).
· cites it 3× “” The first sentence of § 6-10-37, Ala.Code 1975, is substantially identical to the above-quoted portion of Rule 64B.”
In Re Moore, 56 B.R. 7 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 1985).
“As to the essential nature of condemnation as the cleavage point at which a debtor loses all rights to the garnished funds, Code of Alabama, 1975, § 6-10-37 provides: “... If the defendant has notice of the garnishment, the claim of exemption must be interposed before judgment…”
In Re Wilson, 56 B.R. 693 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 1986).
“The withheld wages have not been condemned as provided by Code of Alabama, 1975, § 6-10-37, to perfect the lien of the garnishment and defeat a claim of exemption.”
Parker v. Baldwin Cnty. E. Shore Hosp. Bd., Inc., 560 So. 2d 1046 (Ala. Civ. App. 1989).
“1987), which held in pertinent part: “It is the opinion of this Court that [section 6-10-37, Code 1975] contains a clear expression of the legislative intent that property which can be garnished can also be claimed as exempt.”
Parker v. Baldwin Cnty. E. Shore Hosp. Bd., Inc., 560 So. 2d 1049 (Ala. 1990).
“1987), the Court of Civil Appeals stated in its opinion “it is the opinion of this Court that [§ 6-10-37, Code 1975] contains a clear expression of the legislative intent that property which can be garnished can also be claimed as exempt.”
Avery v. East Alabama Med. Ctr., 514 So. 2d 1380 (Ala. 1987).
“Such specific legislative enactment is found in Code of Alabama (1975), § 6-10-37, which allows for the claiming of exemptions in the garnishment contest.”
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.