This article was published in the February 7, 2012 issue of the
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.
If the bill is signed into law, employers will no longer be
required to hire a Georgia-licensed attorney to execute their
Georgia garnishment answers and will be allowed to use their own
human resources, payroll, or other non-attorney staff to process
their Georgia garnishments. We will keep you informed as to the
status of this bill.
Please be aware, however, that even if the Georgia Supreme
Court's decision is overturned, Georgia employers may still be
required to use a Georgia-licensed attorney for any traverse or
claim that is filed in a Georgia court of record in response to the
garnishment answer. Also note that neither the Georgia Supreme
Court's September 12 decision nor this bill impacts the ability
of companies to represent themselves in garnishment proceedings in
Georgia magistrate courts because, as courts of inquiry, an
attorney is not required in those proceedings.
Although the bill has been passed by the Georgia House and Senate,
the bill may not be signed by the Governor right away, if at all.
Until the bill becomes law, please continue working with the
Georgia-licensed attorney who has been handling your Georgia
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Our speakers will walk attendees through some of the main legislative and regulatory changes on the nation’s immigration horizon and comment on their prospects, separate rhetoric and speculation from fact, discuss the fate of (by then) former president Obama’s contested executive orders on immigration, and highlight the considerations that employers may want to bear in mind to help them prepare their workforces.
In the wake of a tumultuous election where immigration figured as one of the most prominent and hotly-contested issues, and with the January 2017 arrival of a new administration under President-elect Donald Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress, many elements of the nation’s immigration system are subject to changes that could hold significant implications for employers.
Today, the California Supreme Court ruled that California law strictly prohibits on-duty rest periods. "What [the law] require[s] instead is that employers relinquish any control over how employees spend...
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).