Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1992

Schmitt v. Boyle

Schmitt v. Boyle
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 28, 1992 · Ferguson, Hubbart, Jorgenson
598 So. 2d 165; 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4932; 1992 WL 84156 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Schmitt v. Boyle

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Smith, as personal representative of the estate of Blanche Boyle, appeals from a nonfinal order denying a motion for garnishment and injunctive relief. We hold that the funds used to post the supersedeas bond are not garnishable while in the depository of the court. See Leatherman v. Gimourginas, 192 So.2d 301 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966) (funds in custodia legis are not gar-nishable).

Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice and remand with directions that, upon proper application for return of the bond, the trial court should specify when the funds are to be released and notify all parties involved of that fact.

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.