25-505. Limited income withholding orders; definition
A. The department or its agent may issue a limited income withholding order to any employer, payor or other holder of a nonperiodic or lump sum payment that is owed or held for the benefit of an obligor. The department or its agent shall serve the order in the same manner as prescribed in section 25-505.01 for service of income withholding orders. The employer, payor or holder shall deliver or mail by first class mail a copy of the order to the obligor within ten days after service on the employer, payor or holder.
B. The limited income withholding order shall state the amount of current support and any arrearages owed by an obligor and shall direct the employer, payor or holder to withhold and pay to the support payment clearinghouse the amount specified in the order and not otherwise exempt by law.
C. The limited income withholding order shall include a notice to the obligor of the right to an administrative review pursuant to section 25-522. The obligor, employer, payor or holder may contest the limited income withholding order in the same manner prescribed in section 25-505.01 to contest an income withholding order.
D. Notwithstanding sections 23-351 through 23-355, the employer, payor or holder who receives an income withholding order pursuant to section 25-505.01 or an order of assignment pursuant to section 25-504 shall withhold the amount specified and transmit that amount to the support payment clearinghouse immediately.
E. For the purposes of this section, "lump sum payment" includes:
1. Severance pay.
2. Sick pay.
3. Vacation pay.
4. Bonuses.
5. Insurance settlements.
6. Commissions.
7. Stock options.
8. Excess proceeds.
9. Retroactive disability proceeds.
10. Personal injury awards.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case:
state/des v. Torres, 431 P.3d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
state/des v. Torres, 431 P.3d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 21× “Instead, it was a one-time "limited" withholding order issued pursuant to § 25-505. That statute does not apply to regularly recurring income, but instead authorizes issuance of a withholding order to "any employer, payor or other holder of a nonperiodic or lump sum payment that…”
Saenz v. State Fund Workers' Comp. Ins., 943 P.2d 831 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Now A.R.S. § 25-505(F) (Supp.1996), which now requires such funds to be transmitted within two days of payment.”
State v. Clements, No. 1 CA-JV 23-0224 (Ariz. Ct. App. May 23, 2024).
· cites it 10× “Assuming no successful challenge to the order, the Department would take funds exceeding $50 from the inmate’s account and apply it toward the child support order.”
State v. Hutchison, No. 1 CA-CV 19-0524-FC (Ariz. Ct. App. July 9, 2020).
· cites it 8× “] [Hutchison] is aware of, and admits, the obligation for child support in this case and that he is delinquent. [10.] [W]ithholding of periodic earnings has been postponed until [Hutchison’s] release from incarceration, but that does not prohibit the use of other collection…”
Jimenez v. state/ades, No. 1 CA-CV 13-0362 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 25, 2014).
· cites it 10× “3 ¶10 Jimenez confuses the “limited income withholding order” issued by ADES in this case pursuant to A.R.S. § 25-505 with an “income withholding order” issued pursuant to A.”
Saenz v. State Fund Workers's Comp. Ins., 943 P.2d 831 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Now A.R.S. § 25-505(F) (Supp.1996), which now requires such funds to be transmitted within two days of payment.”
Simon v. Simon, No. 1 CA-CV 15-0496-FC (Ariz. Ct. App. July 19, 2016).
· cites it 2× “” Under A.R.S. § 25-505, a trial court can order withholding lump sum payments, but tax refunds are not included in the definition of lump sum payments.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-505(A): 4 cases
state/des v. Torres, 431 P.3d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“Instead, it was a one-time "limited" withholding order issued pursuant to § 25-505. That statute does not apply to regularly recurring income, but instead authorizes issuance of a withholding order to "any employer, payor or other holder of a nonperiodic or lump sum payment that…”
State v. Clements, No. 1 CA-JV 23-0224 (Ariz. Ct. App. May 23, 2024).
“Assuming no successful challenge to the order, the Department would take funds exceeding $50 from the inmate’s account and apply it toward the child support order.”
State v. Hutchison, No. 1 CA-CV 19-0524-FC (Ariz. Ct. App. July 9, 2020).
“] [Hutchison] is aware of, and admits, the obligation for child support in this case and that he is delinquent. [10.] [W]ithholding of periodic earnings has been postponed until [Hutchison’s] release from incarceration, but that does not prohibit the use of other collection…”
Jimenez v. state/ades, No. 1 CA-CV 13-0362 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 25, 2014).
“3 ¶10 Jimenez confuses the “limited income withholding order” issued by ADES in this case pursuant to A.R.S. § 25-505 with an “income withholding order” issued pursuant to A.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-505(C): 1 case
State v. Clements, No. 1 CA-JV 23-0224 (Ariz. Ct. App. May 23, 2024).
“Assuming no successful challenge to the order, the Department would take funds exceeding $50 from the inmate’s account and apply it toward the child support order.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-505(D): 1 case
state/des v. Torres, 431 P.3d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“Instead, it was a one-time "limited" withholding order issued pursuant to § 25-505. That statute does not apply to regularly recurring income, but instead authorizes issuance of a withholding order to "any employer, payor or other holder of a nonperiodic or lump sum payment that…”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-505(E): 2 cases
state/des v. Torres, 431 P.3d 1207 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“Instead, it was a one-time "limited" withholding order issued pursuant to § 25-505. That statute does not apply to regularly recurring income, but instead authorizes issuance of a withholding order to "any employer, payor or other holder of a nonperiodic or lump sum payment that…”
State v. Hutchison, No. 1 CA-CV 19-0524-FC (Ariz. Ct. App. July 9, 2020).
“] [Hutchison] is aware of, and admits, the obligation for child support in this case and that he is delinquent. [10.] [W]ithholding of periodic earnings has been postponed until [Hutchison’s] release from incarceration, but that does not prohibit the use of other collection…”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-505(F): 2 cases
Saenz v. State Fund Workers's Comp. Ins., 943 P.2d 831 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
“NOTES [1] Now A.R.S. § 25-505(F) (Supp.1996), which now requires such funds to be transmitted within two days of payment.”
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.