[rob1978]

A creditor sued my wife and won a judgment against her only (in Oregon). I was not a party to the suit or the credit card. I recently found out they garnished $10k from our joint bank account (also in OR). The “writ” was signed by the creditor’s attorney, not the court. The bank was quick to pay it, without even consulting with us. My wife doesn’t work, so all the income in the account is either from my wages or from state/federal tax refunds electronically deposited (of which I earned 93% of our income last year, she earned 7%). Because of this, I’ve got mortgages and car payments that are going to be returned!

She’s off the account now. I know I have 10 days to challenge the garnishment, so I have to act fast. I’m wondering whether the creditor can take my money like this, and what I can show the court to help them see that this was my money, not hers.

Thanks in advance for any help!

[Squiffy]

I am not sure you will get anywhere. It was a joint account so usually the money is classed as joint assets which means it is as much hers as yours as you are married. So if she owes and didn't pay up, they can take it from the joint account.

[ScottGem]

I agree with what Squiffy said. However, if you can prove that all the money in there was only your earnings you might get a stay. But that would be difficult to prove. For example any tax refunds, even though based primarily on your income, would be considered joint funds.

What bothers me more is that no court signed off on the garnishment order. Once the jusdgment is handed down, the creditor still must obtain a court order to attach any assets. So you may be able to challenge it on the basis that it was not legally obtained.

[rob1978]

I agree with what Squiffy said. However, if you can prove that all the money in there was only your earnings you might get a stay. But that would be difficult to prove. For example any tax refunds, even though based primarily on your income, would be considered joint funds.

What bothers me more is that no court signed off on the garnishment order. Once the jusdgment is handed down, the creditor still must obtain a court order to attach any assets. so you may be able to challenge it on the basis that it was not legally obtained.

I've been told that Attorney's are allowed to sign garnishments in Oregon. I'm wondering how the court would divide the joint checking account if we were dealing with a divorce? Wouldn't the same rationale apply here?

[Squiffy]

I think when dealing with a divorce the courts would be looking at splitting the assets, but as they are not divorcing there would be no need to divide his and hers. Marriage means a union, emotional and financial.

[ScottGem]

Appears whoever told you that is correct under Oregon 18.635 (see here:
Chapter 18 — Judgments). So you are out of luck there unless something else in that statute (and I didn't read it all) was done incorrectly.

[mr.yet]

(Challenge to Garnishment)



18.700 Manner of making challenge to garnishment



18.702 Notice to garnishor and garnishee of challenge to garnishment



18.705 Duties of garnishor and creditor created by challenge to garnishment



18.708 Duties of garnishee created by challenge to garnishment



18.710 Hearing on challenge to garnishment



18.712 Allowance or denial of challenge



18.715 Sanctions



18.718 Special procedures for writs issued for past due support



(Claim by Person Other Than Debtor)



18.725 Claim by person other than debtor for all or part of garnished property


File a claim against the garnishment file it with the court, send a copy to the bank.

In the claim show that your funds are exempt, since you are not party to the judgment, reserve all rights under UCC 1-308.

Since the bank release the funds without a valid signature from the judge and only the attorney signed the garnishment, file a claim against the attorney bond.