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

O.C.G.A. § 18-4-53 (2019)

Summons of continuing garnishment for support; maximum disposable income subject to garnishment; retirement funds not exempted

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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) A summons of continuing garnishment for support shall contain a notice to the garnishee that such garnishment is based on a judgment governed by this article. The form for a summons of continuing garnishment for support is set forth in Code Section 18-4-80, and the optional attachment thereto is set forth in Code Section 18-4-81.

(b) Subject to the limitations set forth in Code Section 18-4-6, the maximum part of disposable earnings for any work week which shall be subject to continuing garnishment for support shall not exceed 50 percent of the defendant’s disposable earnings for that week.

(c) Funds or benefits from an individual retirement account or from a pension or retirement program shall not be exempt from the process of continuing garnishment for support except as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section for other disposable earnings, unless a greater exemption is otherwise provided by law.

History

Code 1981, § 18-4-53, enacted by Ga. L. 2016, p. 8, § 1/SB 255.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

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 Loftin v. Rush, 767 F.2d 800 (11th Cir. 1985) superseded by statute 422 N.J. Super. 561, 29 A.3d 1103 (2011).