Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1577 (2026)

Service of writ on branch of financial institution

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Monies owing to a judgment debtor by a banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, trust company or title insurance company, maintaining branch offices, or credits or other effects belonging to a judgment debtor and in the possession of or under the control of the banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, trust company or title insurance company, may be levied on by serving a copy of the writ of garnishment on the manager or other officer of the banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, trust company or title insurance company, at any office or branch where service is made. No garnishment shall be effective as to any debt owing by the banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, trust company or title insurance company, if the account evidencing the indebtedness is carried at an office or branch other than the office or branch named in the writ and at which service is made or as to any credits or other effects in its possession or under its control at any other office or branch, unless the service of the writ is accompanied by a cash tender of $25 to the garnishee as costs for the search. On the payment of the search fee the writ shall be effective as to any debt owing by the banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, trust company or title insurance company.

B. Notwithstanding subsection A of this section, service of a writ of garnishment on any banking corporation or association, savings bank, savings and loan association or credit union may also be made by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the garnishee's regular place of business, or to the garnishee's statutory agent or at a location that is designated by the garnishee. If served by certified mail, the effective date of service is the date of receipt by the garnishee or the garnishee's statutory agent.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1961–1998 · leading case: San Fernando Motors, Inc. v. Fowler, 498 P.2d 169 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

San Fernando Motors, Inc. v. Fowler, 498 P.2d 169 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 18× “[1] Return of the document was accompanied by an "Affidavit of Service of Process" stating that Link Fowler had been personally served with a copy of the "Writ of Garnishment.”

Desert Wide Cabling & Installation, Inc. v. Wells Fargo & Co., N.A., 958 P.2d 457 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “Another such apparent purpose is to avoid the confusion that might result if writs of garnishment could be served at a place far removed from the branch where the account is maintained. For example, if a writ were served on the home office of a bank to attach an account at a…”

Gonzales v. Whitney, 367 P.2d 668 (Ariz. 1961). · cites it 4× “The clerk * * * shall file the affidavit provided for in § 12-1573, and bond, if any, and immediately issue a writ of garnishment directed to the sheriff or any constable of the county where the garnishee is alleged to be, commanding him forthwith to summon the garnishee * *…”

Heat Pump Equip. Co. v. Glen Alden Corp., 380 P.2d 1016 (Ariz. 1963). · cites it 2× “2d 668 (1961), this Court upheld the service of a writ of garnishment by a private process server, under Rule 4(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, despite the fact that the statute (A.R.S. § 12-1577) provided for service by a sheriff or constable.”

Nat'l Exhibition Co. v. Marx, 453 P.2d 993 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “With the exception of financial institutions, as to which see A.R.S. § 12-1577, subsec. C, as amended, Article 4 of Tit.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1577(A) — 1 case

Desert Wide Cabling & Installation, Inc. v. Wells Fargo & Co., N.A., 958 P.2d 457 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). “Another such apparent purpose is to avoid the confusion that might result if writs of garnishment could be served at a place far removed from the branch where the account is maintained. For example, if a writ were served on the home office of a bank to attach an account at a…”

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.