Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 6-6-450 (2026)
Filing of Answer; Notice Thereof; Oral Examination.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The garnishee must answer under oath according to the terms of the garnishment; and, upon filing, the clerk or register shall give the plaintiff and defendant notice, and the garnishee may, if required by the plaintiff, be examined orally in the presence of the court. Any demand for oral examination required by the plaintiff after filing of written answer by the garnishee must be made by motion filed within 30 days from the date of notice of filing answer.
(Code 1923, §8067; Code 1940, T. 7, §1011.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Buck Creek Indus., Inc. v. Alcon Constr., Inc., 631 F.2d 75 (5th Cir. 1980).
Buck Creek Indus., Inc. v. Alcon Constr., Inc., 631 F.2d 75 (5th Cir. 1980). “Ala. Code § 6-6-450 (1975). This oral answer is considered part of the pleadings.”
Moore v. Moore, 160 So. 3d 325 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014). “” The process of garnishment instructed Chelsea to answer: “(1) whether you are or were indebted to the Plaintiff/Defendant at the time you received this process, or when you make your answer, or during the intervening time, or “(2) whether you will be indebted to the…”
Tinnin v. Tinnin, 391 So. 2d 1047 (Ala. Civ. App. 1980). “With respect to the defendant’s contention that he did not receive notice of the filing of the garnishee’s answer, we find § 6-6-450, Code of Ala.1976, to be controlling.”
David Wayne Moore v. Cherie Frances Capesius, now known as Cherie Capesius Ginn, & Exec. Real Est. Mgmt., I (Ala. 2026). “1 We reverse the judgment of the trial court with instructions to comply with the oral-examination requirement of Ala. Code 1975, § 6-6-450. I. Facts On September 2, 2005, a default judgment was entered against Ginn in the amount of $1,500,000 for personal injuries sustained by…”
Mobile Cnty. Pers. Bd. v. City of Satsuma, 513 So. 2d 2 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987). “§ 6-6-450, Code of Alabama 1975. These notices were sufficient *4 to show that the employee had violated Rule 14.”
McKinney v. 2nd Chance Auto Sales (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 2020). “CODE § 6-6-450 (2018). Upon plaintiff’s timely demand, the garnishee may be subject to an in-court oral examination.”
Radiance Capital Receivables Twelve, LLC v. Bondy's Ford, Inc. (Appeal from Henry Circuit Court: CV-17-1). (Ala. 2024). “See § 6-6-450, Ala. Code 1975. In August 2018, Sherrill moved to stop the wage garnishment.”
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.