O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 18-4-43 (2019)

Default judgment against garnishee in continuing garnishment; relief from default

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When a garnishee fails or refuses to file a garnishee answer at least once every 45 days, such garnishee shall automatically be in default. The default may be opened as provided in Code Section 18-4-21. If the case is still in default after the expiration of the period of 15 days, judgment by default may be entered at any time thereafter against such garnishee for the amount remaining due on the judgment obtained against the defendant as shown in the plaintiff’s affidavit of continuing garnishment.

(b) A garnishee may obtain relief from a default judgment upon the same conditions as provided in Code Section 18-4-24.

History

Code 1981, § 18-4-43, enacted by Ga. L. 2016, p. 8, § 1/SB 255.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions decided under former O.C.G.A. §§ 18-4-90 and 18-4-115 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Garnishable wages of federal employee. - Payment of a default judgment

entered against the United States pursuant to state law for the full amount of unpaid child support was not authorized by federal law. Only those wages due to the garnished federal employee at the time process was served were subject to superimposed state garnishment laws.

Loftin v. Rush, 767 F.2d 800, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 21119 (11th Cir. 1985) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-115). When claim for default arises. - Claim arises against the garnishee at the time the garnishee falls into default by failing to file answers in a continuing garnishment proceeding, and is separate and distinct from any claim which may have existed prior to that time. Fazio v. Growth Dev. Corp. (In re Growth Dev. Corp.), 168 B.R. 1009, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 1890 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1994) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90). Garnishee failed to amend the defective answer as permitted by law and, pursuant to former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90, the garnishee was automatically in default. Because the garnishee failed to establish the presence of a nonamendable defect on the face of the record or pleadings, the court abused the court’s discretion by granting the motion to set aside the default judgment. Oxmoor Portfolio, LLC v. Flooring & Tile Superstore of Conyers, Inc., 320 Ga. App. 640, 740 S.E.2d 363, 2013 Ga. App. LEXIS 250 (2013) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90). In a continuing garnishment action, the trial court erred in failing to enter a de-

fault judgment after the garnishee failed to file answers or open default within 15 days of the first answer and, contrary to the trial court’s ruling, O.C.G.A. § 184-43 did not require the plaintiff to file the motion for default within a certain time period but permitted the motion to be filed anytime thereafter. Rivers v. Rivers, 348 Ga. App. 402, 823 S.E.2d 84, 2019 Ga. App. LEXIS 17 (2019). Former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-91 only applicable to default judgments under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90. - Because a debtor’s principal had answered a garnishment action by a judgment creditor, denying that the principal held any money or assets of the debtor, and the trial court entered a final judgment in favor of the creditor after holding an evidentiary hearing on the merits, it was error for the trial court to have reduced the judgment pursuant to the principal’s motion under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-91, as such was only applicable when a default judgment was obtained pursuant to former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90. United Maint., Inc. v. Wilson, 265 Ga. App. 683, 595 S.E.2d 376, 2004 Ga. App. LEXIS 227 (2004) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 18-4-90).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 6 Am. Jur. 2d, Attachment and Garnishment, § 386.

C.J.S. 38 C.J.S., Garnishment, § 416 et seq.

ARTICLE 3 CONTINUING GARNISHMENT FOR CHILD SUPPORT OR SPOUSAL SUPPORT Cross references. Entry of continuing garnishment provision in child support orders, § 19-6-30.

Enforcement of duty of support generally, T. 19, C. 11.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2019–2026 · leading case: Rivers v. Rivers, 823 S.E.2d 84 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rivers v. Rivers, 823 S.E.2d 84 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 15× “Rivers argues that she was entitled to a default judgment as a matter of law, pursuant to OCGA § 18-4-43 (a), and that the trial court erred in denying her motion.”
Tamie Rae Rivers v. Steven B. Rivers (Ga. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 13× “Rivers argues that she was entitled to a default judgment as a matter of law, pursuant to OCGA § 18-4-43 (a), and that the trial court erred in denying her motion.”
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Walker (Ga. 2026). · cites it 4× “NBCU tried to set aside the default judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3), raising both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), 1 under 1 This statute provides that, [w]hen a garnishee fails or refuses…”
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Walker (Ga. 2026). · cites it 4× “NBCU tried to set aside the default judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3), raising both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), 1 under 1 This statute provides that, [w]hen a garnishee fails or refuses…”
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Hevekiah Walker (Ga. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “NBCU’s motion under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3) raised both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), based upon the due process clauses of the federal and Georgia constitutions and the Georgia Constitution’s…”
— 18-4-43(a) — 3 cases
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Walker (Ga. 2026). “NBCU tried to set aside the default judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3), raising both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), 1 under 1 This statute provides that, [w]hen a garnishee fails or refuses…”
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Walker (Ga. 2026). “NBCU tried to set aside the default judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3), raising both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), 1 under 1 This statute provides that, [w]hen a garnishee fails or refuses…”
Nbcuniversal Media, LLC v. Hevekiah Walker (Ga. Ct. App. 2026). “NBCU’s motion under OCGA § 9-11-60(d)(3) raised both facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to Georgia’s continuing garnishment default statute, OCGA § 18-4-43(a), based upon the due process clauses of the federal and Georgia constitutions and the Georgia Constitution’s…”
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.