Unsecured Interest in Funds Insufficient to Warrant Intervention in Garnishment Action
February 12, 2015BB&T sought to collect a judgment against Brittania Construction by seeking to garnish funds held by an individual named Richard Heath. BB&T claimed that Mr. Heath owed Brittania $178,000 that it was entitled to collect.
As it turns out, Mr. Heath also had a $185,000 unsecured obligation to a Trust that he had agreed to pay using the same funds BB&T sought to garnish. The Trust sought to intervene to protect its interest in those funds, but the trial court granted the other parties’ motion to strike its intervention. The Trust appealed.
On appeal, the Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that although Mr. Heath may owe the Trust money, the Trust could not “show ownership of or an equitable interest in the money held by Heath such that Trust was entitled to intervene in the garnishment action.”
