Leslie Nachman v. Regenocyte Worldwide, Inc., 6:15-mc-76-Orl-40TBS. (2016)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20160330g74
Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER THOMAS B. SMITH , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Leslie Nachman's Motion for Issuance of a Post-Judgment Writ of Garnishment to Coherent Legal and Identity Theft Solutions, Inc. (Doc. 3). On October 22, 2014, the Clerk of Court for the United States District Court for the District of Nevada entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants "Intercellular and Regenocyte" for $49,950 (breach of contract claim); against all defendants for
Summary: ORDER THOMAS B. SMITH , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Leslie Nachman's Motion for Issuance of a Post-Judgment Writ of Garnishment to Coherent Legal and Identity Theft Solutions, Inc. (Doc. 3). On October 22, 2014, the Clerk of Court for the United States District Court for the District of Nevada entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants "Intercellular and Regenocyte" for $49,950 (breach of contract claim); against all defendants for $..
More
ORDER
THOMAS B. SMITH, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Leslie Nachman's Motion for Issuance of a Post-Judgment Writ of Garnishment to Coherent Legal and Identity Theft Solutions, Inc. (Doc. 3). On October 22, 2014, the Clerk of Court for the United States District Court for the District of Nevada entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants "Intercellular and Regenocyte" for $49,950 (breach of contract claim); against all defendants for $49,950 (fraudulent misrepresentations claim); and against all defendants for $100,000 for punitive damages; plus, interest at the federal statutory rate of 4.75% per annum (Doc. 1 at 2). The final judgment was registered with this Court on December 7, 2015. Plaintiff alleges that the judgment has not been satisfied and now moves for a writ of garnishment against Coherent Legal and Identity Theft Solutions, Inc., which Plaintiff alleges may have possession of funds belonging to Defendant Michael R. Calcaterra (Doc. 3 ¶ 1).
Judgment creditors are entitled to a writ of garnishment under Florida law. FLA. STAT. § 77.01. All that is necessary to obtain a writ of garnishment is to "file a motion ... stating the amount of the judgment," FLA. STAT. § 77.03, which Plaintiff has done here. Plaintiff's motion is therefore GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to ISSUE the writ attached to Doc. 3 at 5-6.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
