Kennedy v. Kennedy
The Fourth District held that income withholding orders garnishing 65% of a former husband's Social Security disability benefits to enforce nonmodifiable alimony set in a marital settlement agreement incorporated (but not merged) into a dissolution judgment do not violate the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act's 25% garnishment cap. Applying the rule of the last antecedent and the statute's 1977 amendment history, the court held that section 1673(b)(1)(A)'s qualifiers ('established by State law,' 'affords substantial due process,' 'subject to judicial review') modify only 'an administrative procedure,' not court orders. The court expressly rejected the contrary Maryland decision in Naedel v. Naedel.
Key facts
- Former husband and wife were parties to a marital settlement agreement that was incorporated into but not merged with the dissolution judgment, which reserved jurisdiction for enforcement of alimony obligations.
- An income withholding order was issued garnishing 65% of the former husband's Social Security disability benefits to enforce the nonmodifiable alimony obligation arising from the incorporated marital settlement agreement.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is the first Florida decision to construe the Consumer Credit Protection Act's 25% garnishment cap in the context of alimony arising from an incorporated-but-not-merged marital settlement agreement, and it rejects… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.