Filing# 140635032 E-Filed 12/18/2021 04:41:45 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH mDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

FIRST AMERICAN BANK, as successor CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION: AH

by merger to Bank of Coral Gables, LLC, CASE NO: 50-2016-CA-9292-XXXX-MB

vs.
Plaintiff,

LAURENCE S. SCHNEIDER,

PY
STEPHANIE L. SCHNEIDER, et. al.,

Defendants,

O
and

C
THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY,

Garnishee,

ED
REAL ESTATE & FINANCE, Inc., a
Florida Corporation,
FI
Proposed Intervenor.
TI

----------------'/

EMERGENCY MOTION TO DISSOLVE WRITS OF GARNISHMENT

ER

PURSUANT TO FLA. STAT. §77.07

COMES NOW, the Proposed Intervenor, Real Estate & Finance, Inc., A Florida
C

Corporation (hereinafter "Real Estate & Finance"), through undersigned counsel and pursuant to
A

Fla. Stat. §77 .07 (2) moves for entry of an Order dissolving the Writs of Garnishment issued in

the Action sub judice against The Northern Trust Company ("Northern Trust") as they relate to
T
O

Real Estate & Finance's Business Checking account at Northern Trust (Hereinafter the
N

"Account"), and in support thereof states:

1. On September 22, 2021, this Court entered a Final Judgment in the amount of

$1,547,391.54 against Defendants Laurence L. Schneider ("Laurence Schneider") and

Stephanie L. Schneider ("Stephanie Schneider"), (collectively "the Defendants").

2. In an effort to enforce the Judgment, on October 13, 2021, Plaintiff filed Motions

FILED: PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL, JOSEPH ABRUZZO, CLERK, 12/18/2021 04:41 :45 PM
requesting the entry of Writs of Garnishment ("the Writs") against Northern Trust.

3. On October 25, 2021, the Clerk of this Court issued the Writs of Garnishment

("the Writs"), one directed at whatever personal property of Laurence Schneider that Northern

Trust had in its possession or control, and the other at whatever personal property of Stephanie

Schneider that Northern Trust had in its possession or control.

PY
4. Plaintiff served the Writs on Northern Trust on October 29, 2021. Despite the

very narrow focus of the Writs, which were only directed to personal property owned by the

O
Defendants which was under Northern Trust's control, Northern Trust froze and retained the

C
Business Checking Account of Real Estate & Finance, with an approximate balance of

ED
thirty-eight thousand six hundred and nineteen ($38,619.54) dollars and fifty-four cents.

5. On November 18, 2021, Northern Trust filed its Answer confirming that the
FI
Account was in fact "titled in the name of Real Estate & Finance" and that it was retaining the
TI

funds therein on the ground that Defendant Laurence Schneider is an "authorized signer" on the

Business Check Account of Real Estate & Finance. 1

ER

6. Fla. Stat. §77.07(2) provides a statutory remedy through which a person alleging
C

an ownership interest in garnished property may move to dissolve the writ by alleging that any
A

allegation in the Plaintiffs Motion for Writ of Garnishment is untrue.

7. Inasmuch as the Account is concerned, it is simply untrue that Northern Trust is

T
O

indebted to or has tangible or intangible properly belonging to the Defendants, as it is owned

N

solely by Real Estate & Finance.

LEGAL ARGUMENT

Florida law provides for the remedy of garnishment pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 77.01 et. seq.

A writ of garnishment can only be directed at "any debt due to defendant by a third person or

any debt not evidenced by a negotiable instrument that will become due absolutely through the

2
passage of time only to the defendant by a third person, and any tangible or intangible personal

property of defendant in the possession or control of a third person." See §77.01, Fla. Stat.

(2021) (emphasis added). In tum, §77.07(2), Fla. Stat. provides:

The defendant and any other person having an ownership interest in

the property, as disclosed by the garnishee's answer, shall file and
serve a motion to dissolve the garnishment within 20 days after the
date indicated in the certificate of service on the defendant and such

PY
other person of the plaintiffs notice required by Section 77.055,
stating that any allegation in plaintiffs motion for writ is untrue. On
such motion this issue shall be tried, and if the allegation in

O
plaintiffs motion which is denied is not proved to be true, the
garnishment shall be dissolved. Failure of the defendant or other

C
interested person to timely file and serve the motion to dissolve
within such time limitation shall result in the striking of the motion
as an unauthorized nullity by the court, and the proceedings shall be

ED
in a default posture as to the party involved.

The garnishment statute is in derogation of the common law and thus is to be strictly construed.
FI
Gray Robinson, P.A. v. Fireline Restoration, Inc., 46 So. 3d 170, 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
TI

("Garnishment is a statutory remedy which is limited to the scope and authority of the statute").
ER

In paragraph 4 of its Answer, Northern Trust has confirmed that the Account is in fact

"titled in the name of Real Estate & Finance" and that it is retaining the sum of $38,619.54, per
C

the Writ of Garnishment. Under Florida law, funds in a bank account are presumed to belong to
A

the person in whose name it stands. See Stanbro v. McCormick 105, LLC, 213 So. 3d 925, 927
T

(Fla 4th DCA 2017); see also Branch Banking and Trust Company v. Ark development/
O

Oceanview, LLC, 150 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Accordingly, the presumption is that the
N

Account is owned by Intervenor, Real Estate & Finance.

It is a basic principle of garnishment law that a plaintiff merely stands in the shoes of the

judgment debtor. Ginsberg v. Goldstein, 404 So.2d 1098 (Fla. App. 1981). As such, it is

universally held that property which is not actually and in "good conscience" deemed to be

owned by the debtor may not be secured by the judgment creditor. Id. Since the Account is

3
 owned solely by Real Estate & Finance, there is no legal basis for Northern Trust to retain the

funds therein pursuant to the Writs.

CONCLUSION

In this proceeding, Plaintiff seeks to garnish any debt due to Defendants by Northern

Trust. According to the Answer filed by Northern Trust, the Account is titled in the name of

PY
Real Estate & Finance. Under Florida law, funds in a bank account are presumed to belong to

the person(s) or entity in whose name it stands. Since Real Estate & Finance is the owner of the

O
Account, it cannot legally be deemed to be property of the Defendants which is in the control

C
or possession of the Garnishee Northern Trust. As such, the Account is not properly subject to

ED
the Writs and this Court should enter an Order dissolving the Writs (as they relate to the

Account) and directing Northern Trust to immediately release the Account of Real Estate &
FI
Finance from the scope of this proceeding.
TI

WHEREFORE, REAL ESTATE & FINANCE, INC., requests that this Court enter
ER

an Order granting its Emergency Motion to Dissolve Writs of Garnishment pursuant to Fla.

Stat. §77.07(2) and granting Real Estate & Finance immediate access to the Account at
C

Northern Trust, and any other relief it deems just and proper.
A
T

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
O

I CERTIFY that a copy hereof has been furnished on December 17, 2021, via email service to all
N

parties designated to receive Service of Court documents via Florida's eFiling Portal pertaining to
this case

Respectfully Submitted,
NLLaw,LLC
Attorneys for the Proposed Intervenor
5313 Collins A venue
Suite 408
Miami Beach, FL 33140

4
 Ph.: (786) 870-2738
By: /s/ Robert F. Bollinger
Robert F. Bollinger, Esq. Florida Bar No.: 972177
Service Email: NLlawLLC@gmail.com
Secondary Email: macmgm4@gmail.com

PY
O
C
ED
FI
TI
ER
C
A
T
O
N