Georgia Governor Signs Law Allowing Employers To Directly Answer Garnishment
On February 8, 2012, Governor Nathan Deal signed HB 683 into law, overturning the Georgia Supreme Court’s recent decision requiring Georgia employers to use a Georgia-licensed attorney when filing answers to garnishments in state courts of record. Under the new law, effective immediately, employers may use human resources, payroll and other non-attorney employees, third-party vendors or outside counsel to respond to Georgia garnishment actions.
Garnishment Reform Comes to Georgia Businesses
Effective immediately, businesses in Georgia can save themselves the expense of using legal counsel to file routine garnishment answers. The new law, signed by Governor Nathan Deal on February 7, 2012, allows businesses to appoint an “authorized officer or employee†to file such answers and declares that such filing “shall not constitute the practice of law.†This reverses the Georgia Supreme Court’s 2011 decision that held that filing garnishment answers by a non-attorney is the unlicensed practice of law.
Georgia Garnishment Law Amended
Executive Summary: Georgia businesses are once again able to answer garnishments through an authorized officer or employee rather than an attorney.
Rules For Garnishments In Georgia Changed Again
As you know, last year the Georgia Supreme Court issued a new rule prohibiting non-lawyers, such as payroll clerks or human resources professionals, from signing garnishment pleadings that are filed in court. Doing so was, in the Court's view, the unlicensed practice of law. Our Legal Alert on that development was issued in September.
Governor Signs Law to Overturn Rule Requiring Georgia Attorneys to Answer Garnishments
On February 8, 2012, Governor Nathan Deal signed HB 683 into law. HB 683 effectively overturns the Georgia Supreme Court’s recent decision requiring employers to use a Georgia-licensed attorney to file answers to garnishments in Georgia courts of record. Under the new law, which becomes effective immediately, employers may use a Georgia-licensed attorney, their own in-house staff (including human resources, payroll, and other non-attorney staff), or other third-party vendors to handle responses to summonses of garnishment in Georgia.
Georgia Supreme Court Decision Requiring Georgia Attorneys to Answer Georgia Garnishments May Be Overturned
The Georgia business community may have successfully rallied against the September 12, 2011 Georgia Supreme Court decision requiring any answer of garnishment filed in a Georgia court of record to be signed by a Georgia-licensed attorney. The Georgia House of Representatives has approved a bill that would reverse the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision and allow employers to execute and file garnishment answers without the involvement of an attorney. Last week, and without discussion, the Georgia Senate unanimously passed the bill, and now the bill will be sent to Governor Nathan Deal for his final approval. The new law would be effective upon the Governor’s signature.
Noncompete News: Georgia Court uses Restrictive Covenant Act to Blue Pencil Nonsolicit Agreement
Executive Summary: In one of the first (if not the first) published decision applying Georgia's new Restrictive Covenants Act ("RCA"), the federal district court for the Northern District of Georgia "blue penciled" or modified an otherwise overbroad nonsolicitation of customers provision.
Is Your Business Prepared To Comply with the Georgia Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011?
On May 13, 2011, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed into law House Bill #87, a comprehensive immigration law mandating employer verification compliance and establishing criminal penalties for various acts. Some have touted the law as one of the toughest immigration laws in the nation and claim the Georgia law is similar to many provisions in Arizona’s S.B. 1070 currently under legal challenge in the State of Arizona. On June 2, 2011, several civil rights and labor groups filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia challenging several provisions of the AZ-style legislation on constitutional grounds. This article will focus on the main employment verification provisions of the new law as well as various criminal provisions that could impact employers and/or their employees.
Georgia Supreme Court Rules Corporations Must Use an Attorney to Answer Garnishments
Georgia’s garnishment law places unique responsibilities on employers. They must serve and file an answer to the summons of garnishment at 30-day intervals throughout the life of a continuing garnishment, in addition to withholding and remitting a portion of the employee’s disposable earnings. Failure to file and serve these answers at any point can result in a default judgment and the employer becoming liable for the employee’s debt.
Georgia Attorneys Alone May Answer Georgia Garnishments
On September 12, 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court approved an advisory opinion issued by the State Bar of Georgia Standing Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law. The opinion interpreted existing Georgia law as requiring all garnishment answers filed in Georgia courts to be signed by an attorney licensed to practice in the state. Consequently, as of September 12, all corporate employers must use a Georgia-licensed attorney to respond to a summons of garnishment issued by a Georgia state or superior court. Failure to comply with this rule can result in default and potential criminal sanctions for the unauthorized practice of law.
