Hawaii
Hawaii Debt Collection Laws: The Bracket Garnishment Formula, 6-Year Debt Limit, and Repossession
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 12, 2026). · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Hawaii creditors cannot garnish a paycheck on their own initiative. Outside of child support, tax collection, and federal administrative garnishment for debts like defaulted student loans, a collector must sue you, win a judgment, and then have a garnishee summons served on your employer. Most garnishments begin with a default judgment entered because the borrower never answered the lawsuit, so responding to the summons is the single most valuable move you can make. Once a judgment exists, though, Hawaii's process moves fast: the garnishee summons issues without any further court proceeding or advance notice to you, and withholding starts as soon as your employer is served.
How Wage Garnishment Works in Hawaii
Hawaii's formula, set out in HRS 652-1 and worked through on the official Hawaii Judiciary garnishee form, is unlike any other state's. From wages remaining after legally required withholdings, the employer withholds:
- 5% of the first $100 per month,
- 10% of the next $100 per month, and
- 20% of everything over $200 per month, or the equivalent portion per week.
That is not the whole rule. The Judiciary's garnishee calculation form instructs the employer, in capital letters, to also run the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act calculation, the lesser of 25% of disposable earnings or the excess over 30 times the federal minimum wage, and to use whichever calculation is most favorable to the employee.
This is the nuance nearly every summary gets wrong: Hawaii's brackets are not simply stricter than federal law. The form's own worked example shows a moderate earner for whom the federal calculation permits far less withholding per month than the Hawaii brackets would, so the federal number governs. At higher incomes, the relationship can flip and Hawaii's 20% top bracket becomes the more protective one. The employer must take the smaller amount either way, and you have the right to ask your employer to show the calculation and to request a court hearing under HRS 652-1(d) if you believe the garnishment is being computed incorrectly.
One procedural warning: once the creditor holds a judgment, the garnishee summons issues without further court proceedings and without advance notice to you, and withholding is continuous from service onward. Hawaii has no head of household exemption; the bracket formula plus the most-favorable-calculation rule is the wage protection.
On firing, the Judiciary form states that the law prohibits an employer from discharging any employee because the employee's wages have been garnished, phrased without the one-debt limit that federal law carries. That broader phrasing has a Hawaii statutory basis. HRS 378-32(a)(1) makes it unlawful for an employer to suspend, discharge, or discriminate against an employee solely because the employer was summoned as a garnishee in a case where the employee is the debtor, and it carries no equivalent of the federal one-debt limit in 15 U.S.C. 1674. It also reaches suspension and discrimination, not only firing.
Two limits matter in practice. The protection applies only where the garnishment was the sole reason for the employer's action, and under HRS 378-33 a complaint must be filed with the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations within thirty days of the act or of learning about it, which is a far shorter window than most employment claims allow. Chapter 378 part III also defines employer to exclude the State, its political subdivisions, and the federal government, so public employees fall back on the federal rule.
Bank Accounts and Exempt Property
A judgment creditor can also garnish bank accounts. Directly deposited federal benefits such as Social Security carry an automatic shield: the bank must protect an amount equal to the last two months of benefit deposits under 31 CFR Part 212 before freezing anything, and Social Security is broadly protected from commercial creditors under 42 U.S.C. 407 even beyond that.

Hawaii's own personal property exemption statute, HRS 651-121(6), confirmed directly against the live statute text, exempts «the wages, salaries, commissions, and all other compensation for personal services due to the debtor for services rendered during the thirty-one days before the date of the proceeding» from attachment and execution. That is a general personal-property exemption, textually distinct from the chapter 652 garnishment brackets that govern post-judgment continuing wage garnishment specifically; the two statutes do not cross-reference each other, so how they interact is not resolved on the face of either one. This article does not attempt to force a reconciliation between them, and anyone facing a bank levy in Hawaii should raise both with the court or a lawyer rather than assume one displaces the other.
How Long Collectors Have to Sue: Hawaii's Statute of Limitations
Hawaii keeps this unusually simple. HRS 657-1(1) gives actions for the recovery of any debt founded upon a contract, obligation, or liability a single 6-year deadline. There is no written versus oral split, which means the fight that consumes collection litigation in most states, whether a credit card is a written contract or an open account, has no payoff in Hawaii: it is 6 years either way. For running accounts, HRS 657-2 starts the clock from the last item proved in the account.
Revival is where Hawaii is genuinely unsettled, and for a specific reason. The state repealed its statutory acknowledgment and part-payment provisions, former HRS 657-16 and 657-17, in 1976 and never enacted replacements, so chapter 657 contains no revival provision at all today. Court annotations indicate that under common law principles a new promise or acknowledgment can still bind the debtor for a fresh period, and some authority treats part payment as evidence of such a promise. The practical advice is the same as in stricter states: do not make a payment on, or sign anything about, a debt that may be past the 6-year mark without first getting advice, because the downside if revival applies is a fully suable debt.
An expired deadline does not erase the debt. The collector loses the courthouse, but may still request payment, and negative credit reporting runs on its own roughly 7-year federal clock. For other Hawaii case types, see the Hawaii statute of limitations guide.
Rules Debt Collectors Must Follow
Third-party collectors working Hawaii debts are bound by the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: no harassment, no misrepresentation of the amount or legal status of the debt, and validation information at first contact. Under Regulation F, 12 CFR 1006.26, a debt collector must not bring or threaten a lawsuit on a time-barred debt. Given Hawaii's unsettled revival picture, that federal rule is your firmest ground when a collector pushes on old debt.
Hawaii also has its own collection agencies chapter, HRS chapter 443B, and it gives you something federal law does not: a licensing question you can check. Under HRS 443B-3, no collection agency may collect or attempt to collect any money alleged to be due and owing from any person who resides or does business in Hawaii without first registering under the chapter. Registration is not a formality either. It requires a bond, a regular active business office in the State, and a designated principal collector, so an out-of-state phone room working your account may be operating unlawfully in Hawaii.
That requirement gets litigated. The Hawaii Supreme Court held that a Kentucky-based company hired to provide subrogation and claims recovery services was a collection agency within the chapter and subject to the registration requirement (117 Haw. 153, 177 P.3d 341 (2008)). In 2020, a federal district court refused a collector summary judgment on its claim that it was exempt from registering, noting that the burden of proving an exemption rests on the collector rather than on the consumer (475 F. Supp. 3d 1119).
The chapter also sets state conduct rules that parallel the FDCPA and in places go beyond it. HRS 443B-15 bars threats and coercion, including threatening that nonpayment will lead to arrest. HRS 443B-16 bars harassment and abuse. HRS 443B-17 bars unreasonable publication, including passing false information about your debt to your employer or your relatives. HRS 443B-18 bars fraudulent, deceptive, or misleading representations, including collecting under any name other than the agency's true name. HRS 443B-19 bars unfair or unconscionable means, and it specifically prohibits a collection agency from charging you its own fees for collecting and from contacting you once it knows you are represented by an attorney whose name and address it has.
Read the remedy realistically rather than as a guaranteed payday. HRS 443B-20 provides that a violation of the chapter constitutes an unfair or deceptive act or practice for purposes of HRS 480-2, but in the same 2008 decision the Hawaii Supreme Court held that consumers who paid a lien to a company that had violated the registration requirement had not shown an injury supporting a private damages suit under HRS 480-13(b). In most cases the practical value of chapter 443B is the leverage it gives you and the complaint route through the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, which grants registrations and can fine, suspend, or revoke one under HRS 443B-2.
Car Repossession in Hawaii
Hawaii has adopted the Uniform Commercial Code's secured transactions framework at HRS 490:9-609, confirmed directly against the live statute text: after default, a secured party may take possession of collateral through judicial process, or without judicial process if it can do so without a breach of the peace, and must otherwise dispose of the collateral in a commercially reasonable manner.

Two Hawaii-specific consumer protections sit alongside that general rule, and both are current statutes rather than leads to chase. Under HRS 481M-15, a lessee who breaches a lease-purchase agreement, including by failing to make a timely payment, has the right to reinstate the original agreement without losing any rights or options previously acquired under it, provided the lessee promptly surrendered the property to the lessor when asked and not more than thirty days have passed since the return. That window extends to sixty days if the lessee has already made more than sixty per cent of the total number of payments required to acquire ownership. The lessor may charge a reinstatement fee, but the statute caps it at the outstanding accrued missed payments and late charges plus no more than $5, and on reinstatement the lessor must supply either the same item or a substitute of equivalent quality and condition.
Under HRS 476-18, no provision in a credit sale contract by which the buyer executes a power of attorney appointing the seller, the holder of the contract, or another person acting on the buyer's behalf as the buyer's agent to collect payments or repossess the goods is enforceable. If a contract you signed contains that kind of clause, it does not give the seller the authority it appears to give.
If You Are Being Garnished or Sued in Hawaii
Take it in order. Answer the lawsuit before the deadline in the summons; because Hawaii's garnishee process runs without further notice once judgment enters, the lawsuit itself is your best and often only checkpoint. If a garnishment is already running, ask your employer to show the calculation and confirm the more favorable of the two formulas is being used, and request a hearing under HRS 652-1(d) if it is not. If a third-party collector is involved, check whether it is registered under HRS chapter 443B before you assume it is entitled to collect. If the debt is old, check the dates against the 6-year deadline before paying anything, and get advice before signing any acknowledgment. If the garnishment math still leaves you unable to cover essentials, bankruptcy's automatic stay stops wage garnishment immediately; see Hawaii bankruptcy laws for how Hawaii's exemptions apply there.
Overwhelmed by debt? Get a free bankruptcy consultation
Bankruptcy can stop foreclosure, wage garnishment, and creditor calls, and which debts you can clear and what property you keep depend on your state's exemptions. Get a free, confidential consultation with a bankruptcy attorney to understand your options. There is no obligation.
Information last verified on 2026-08-12. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Related Resources
- Debt Collection Laws by State
- Statute of Limitations on Debt
- How to Stop Wage Garnishment
- Car Repossession Laws
- Hawaii Statute of Limitations
- Hawaii Bankruptcy Laws
Last updated: 2026-08-12.
More Hawaii Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How much of my paycheck can be garnished in Hawaii?
Hawaii's bracket formula withholds 5% of the first $100 of monthly after-withholding wages, 10% of the next $100, and 20% of everything above $200 a month. But the official Judiciary form also requires the employer to run the federal 25% calculation and apply whichever result takes less from you, so the real answer depends on your income level.
Is Hawaii's garnishment law stricter than federal law?
Not uniformly. At moderate incomes the federal calculation frequently protects more of the paycheck than Hawaii's brackets, and at higher incomes the Hawaii brackets can protect more. The employer must use the calculation most favorable to the employee, which is the actual rule worth remembering.
How long can a collector sue on a debt in Hawaii?
Six years under HRS 657-1, for written and oral contract debts alike. Hawaii has no written versus oral split, so credit cards, personal loans, and medical bills all carry the same 6-year deadline, with open running accounts measured from the last item in the account under HRS 657-2.
Does a partial payment restart the statute of limitations in Hawaii?
Hawaii repealed its statutory revival provisions, former HRS 657-16 and 657-17, in 1976 and did not replace them, so chapter 657 contains no revival section today. Court annotations indicate a new promise or acknowledgment can still revive a debt under common law principles, and some authority treats part payment as evidence of such a promise. Until you have advice on your specific situation, treat payments and signed letters on old debt as potentially restarting the clock.
Does a debt collector have to be registered in Hawaii?
Yes. HRS 443B-3 bars any collection agency from collecting or attempting to collect from a person who resides or does business in Hawaii without first registering under chapter 443B, and registration requires a bond, a regular active business office in the State, and a designated principal collector. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs grants registrations and can fine, suspend, or revoke one. Checking whether the collector working your account is registered is one of the few concrete state-law checks a Hawaii consumer can make.
Can I be fired for having my wages garnished in Hawaii?
Not if the garnishment is the sole reason. HRS 378-32(a)(1) makes it unlawful for a Hawaii employer to suspend, discharge, or discriminate against an employee solely because the employer was summoned as a garnishee in a case where that employee is the debtor, and unlike the federal rule in 15 U.S.C. 1674 it carries no one-debt limit. The catch is the deadline: HRS 378-33 requires the complaint to reach the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations within thirty days. Chapter 378 part III excludes public employers, so state, county, and federal workers rely on the federal rule.
Do I get notice before a garnishment starts in Hawaii?
Not after judgment. Once the creditor wins the lawsuit, the garnishee summons issues without further court proceedings or advance notice to you, and your employer must start withholding when served. The lawsuit itself is your notice, which is why answering it matters so much.
Updates
Added Hawaii's own collection agency law (HRS chapter 443B, including the registration requirement collectors must meet before collecting from Hawaii residents), replaced four unverified hedges with the actual statutes they described (HRS 481M-15, 476-18, 378-32 and the 1976 repeal of the revival provisions), and added the thirty-day deadline for a wrongful-discharge complaint.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 652: GARNISHMENT
§ 652-1Garnishee process; "garnishee fund"In force
(a) Before judgment. When any goods or effects of a debtor are in the possession of an attorney, agent, factor, or trustee (in this chapter jointly and severally included in the term "garnishee"), or when any debt is due from any person (also included under the term "garnishee") to a debtor, or when any person has in the person's possession for safekeeping any moneys of the debtor, any creditor may bring the creditor's action against the debtor and in the creditor's petition for process, or by amendments of the complaint at any time before judgment, after meeting the requirements of section 652-1.5, may request the court to insert in the process a direction that service of a true and attested copy thereof be made upon the garnishee[,] in any of the manners described under section 652-2.5[,] and to summon the garnishee to appear personally upon the day or term appointed in the process for hearing the action or at any other time appointed by the court and then and there on oath to answer all of the following inquiries, herein inclusively referred to as the "disclosure": (1) Whether at the time the copy was served on the garnishee, the garnishee had any of the goods or effects of…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 11 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hawaii courts have construed the reach of HRS § 652-1. Brunswick Corporation v. Galaxy Cocktail Lounge, Inc. (1973) held the then-current statute unconstitutional as applied to prejudgment garnishment of bank accounts, for want of prior notice and hearing. A 2000 Bank of Hawaii and DeYoung appeal held pledged stock garnishable.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- In Re the Arbitration Between Bank of Hawaii & DeYoung (Hawaii Supreme Court 2000, 92 Haw. 347)✓A judgment creditor garnished baking-company shares its debtor had pledged to another bank as collateral; the court held the pledged shares were garnishable 'effects' under section 652-1 and that the secured party, having declared no default, could not dissolve the garnishment.
- Brunswick Corporation v. Galaxy Cocktail Lounge, Inc. (Hawaii Supreme Court 1973, 54 Haw. 656)✓A creditor froze a guarantor's commercial bank account by prejudgment garnishee summons served a month before the complaint reached her; the court held that applying section 652-1 to bank accounts, for which it gave no prior notice or hearing, violated due process.
- Rosales v. Duell (Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals 2008, 117 Haw. 44)“…ck was a “contingent debt” not subject to garnishment under HRS § 652-1 (1993 & Supp.2006). 5…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 657: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
§ 657-1Six yearsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
The following actions shall be commenced within six years next after the cause of action accrued, and not after: (1) Actions for the recovery of any debt founded upon any contract, obligation, or liability, excepting such as are brought upon the judgment or decree of a court; excepting further that actions for the recovery of any debt founded upon any contract, obligation, or liability made pursuant to chapter 577A shall be governed by chapter 577A; (2) Actions upon judgments or decrees rendered in any court not of record in the State, or, subject to section 657-9, in any court of record in any foreign jurisdiction; (3) Actions for taking or detaining any goods or chattels, including actions in the nature of replevin; and (4) Personal actions of any nature whatsoever not specifically covered by the laws of the State. [CC 1859, §1036; am imp L 1907, c 113, §1; am L 1913, c 19, §1; RL 1925, §2639; RL 1935, §3910; am L 1943, c 139, §1; RL 1945, §10421; RL 1955, §241-1; am L 1965, c 139, §1; HRS §657-1; am L 1972, c 105, §1(a); am L 1978, c 109, §3]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 99 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Pele Defense Fund v. Paty (Hawaii Supreme Court 1992, 73 Haw. 578)“…ather than the six-year statute of limitations set forth in HRS § 657-1 (4). 12 Federal law di…”
- Blair v. Ing (Hawaii Supreme Court 2001, 95 Haw. 247)“…t the statute of limitations applicable to contract claims, HRS § 657-1(1), governs legal malpractice claims).…”
- Au v. Au (Hawaii Supreme Court 1981, 63 Haw. 263)“…otion contends that this Court should reconsider the use of HRS § 657-1(4) as the limitations period for counts…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 651: 651 Attachment and Execution
§ 651-121Certain personal property and insurance thereon, exemptIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
The following described personal property of an individual up to the value set forth shall be exempt from attachment and execution as follows: (1) All necessary household furnishings and appliances, books and wearing apparel, ordinarily and reasonably necessary to, and personally used by a debtor or the debtor's family residing with the debtor; and, in addition thereto, jewelry, watches, and items of personal adornment up to an aggregate cash value not exceeding $1,000; (2) One motor vehicle up to a value of $2,575 over and above all liens and encumbrances on the motor vehicle; provided that the value of the motor vehicle shall be measured by established wholesale used car prices customarily found in guides used by Hawaii motor vehicle dealers; or, if not listed in such guides, fair wholesale market value, with necessary adjustment for condition; (3) Any combination of the following: tools, implements, instruments, uniforms, furnishings, books, equipment, one commercial fishing boat and nets, one motor vehicle, and other personal property ordinarily and reasonably necessary to and personally owned and used by the debtor in the exercise of the debtor's trade, business, calling,…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in Hawaii (2026): Exemptions & Means Test
United States Code Title 42
§ 407Assignment of benefitsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
The right of any person to any future payment under this subchapter shall not be transferable or assignable, at law or in equity, and none of the moneys paid or payable or rights existing under this subchapter shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process, or to the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law. No other provision of law, enacted before, on, or after April 20, 1983, may be construed to limit, supersede, or otherwise modify the provisions of this section except to the extent that it does so by express reference to this section. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit withholding taxes from any benefit under this subchapter, if such withholding is done pursuant to a request made in accordance with section 3402(p)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by the person entitled to such benefit or such person’s representative payee.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1,007 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal courts have read section 407 against its own exceptions. Sykes v. Bank of America (2013) held SSI benefits are not attachable under the section 659(a) child-support exception because they are not remuneration for employment. Lee v. Schweiker (1984) held section 407 shields beneficiaries from creditors, not SSA in bankruptcy.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Sykes v. Bank of America (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2013, 723 F.3d 399)✓A child support agency restrained an SSI recipient's bank account; the Second Circuit held SSI benefits are not remuneration for employment, so Section 659(a) does not authorize the levy, and it revived his Section 407(a) claim, leaving the merits open.
- Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (Supreme Court of the United States 2008, 552 U.S. 214)“…NS Opinion of the Court process” in 42 U. S. C. §407(a). Applying ejusdem generis, we conclu…”
- Lee v. Schweiker (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1984, 739 F.2d 870)✓The SSA kept deducting a $746.50 overpayment from a retiree's monthly benefits after she filed Chapter 13; the Third Circuit held Section 407 protects recipients from creditors and gives the SSA no shield against the Bankruptcy Code's limits.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can Social Security Be Garnished? What Section 407 Actually Protects, Debt Collection Laws by State: Garnishment, SOL, and Repossession Rules
Code of Federal Regulations Title 12
§ 1006.26Collection of time-barred debts.In forcecited in 37 of our articles
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Statute of limitations means the period prescribed by applicable law for bringing a legal action against the consumer to collect a debt. (2) Time-barred debt means a debt for which the applicable statute of limitations has expired. (b) Legal actions and threats of legal actions prohibited. A debt collector must not bring or threaten to bring a legal action against a consumer to collect a time-barred debt. This paragraph (b) does not apply to proofs of claim filed in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (2024) dismissed FDCPA claims built on 12 CFR 1006.26(b), reasoning it bars only collection of time-barred debts and the loans at issue were not time barred. Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (2025) dismissed a Regulation F claim because nonjudicial foreclosure is not covered by the FDCPA.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (District Court, S.D. Ohio 2024)✓A borrower claimed a servicer's letter and billing statement lacked language required by 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court granted the servicer summary judgment, since the rule only bars collecting time-barred debts and it had already found her HELOC and mortgage enforceable.
- Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (District Court, E.D. Virginia 2025)✓Pro se homeowners alleged a servicer and foreclosure attorneys pursued a time-barred, discharged second mortgage in violation of 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court dismissed that claim, holding parties carrying out a nonjudicial foreclosure are not FDCPA debt collectors.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Idaho Debt Collection Laws: Garnishment Limits, Debt Deadlines, and Repossession, Maine Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Michigan Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
United States Code Title 15
§ 1674Restriction on discharge from employment by reason of garnishmentIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
No employer may discharge any employee by reason of the fact that his earnings have been subjected to garnishment for any one indebtedness. Whoever willfully violates subsection (a) of this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 48 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal appeals courts have held that 15 U.S.C. 1674 gives no private right of action to an employee fired over a garnishment. Smith v. Cotton Brothers Baking Co., Inc. (1980) found no implied civil remedy, and Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (1983) agreed, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor under Section 1676.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- James E. Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1983, 701 F.2d 777)✓An employee fired after his wages were garnished sued his employer under 15 U.S.C. 1674(a); the Ninth Circuit declined to follow its own Stewart precedent and held Congress created no private right of action, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor.
- Hodgson v. Cleveland Municipal Court (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1971, 326 F. Supp. 419)✓The Secretary of Labor argued federal garnishment law preempted Ohio's narrower anti-discharge provision; the court found no showing that 15 U.S.C. 1674, a self-enforcing criminal section, was frustrated by the Ohio statute, and no justiciable controversy under it.
- Reginald O. Wallace v. Debron Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 1974, 494 F.2d 674)✓A Black welder was fired under a rule barring two garnishments in a year; reversing summary judgment on his Title VII disparate-impact claim, the Eighth Circuit read 15 U.S.C. 1674 as preventing discharge for one indebtedness, not authorizing it for others.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Arkansas Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Georgia Debt Collection Laws: Garnishment Caps, the 10-Day Repo Notice, and Debt Time Limits, Alabama Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Hawaii State Judiciary, Form 3DC27, Garnishee Information and Calculation (garnishment of wages)(courts.state.hi.us).gov
- HRS 657-1, Six Years, Statute of Limitations(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- HRS 652-1, Garnishee Process; Garnishee Fund (Bracket Formula)(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- HRS 651-121(6), Certain Personal Property and Insurance Thereon, Exempt (31-Day Wage Exemption)(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- HRS 490:9-609, Secured Party's Right to Take Possession After Default (UCC Article 9)(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- 12 CFR 1006.26, Collection of time-barred debts (Regulation F)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 31 CFR Part 212, Garnishment of accounts containing federal benefit payments(ecfr.gov).gov
- HRS 443B-3, Registration Required (Hawaii Collection Agencies chapter)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 443B-18, Fraudulent, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 443B-20, Unfair Competition, Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 481M-15, Reinstatement of Agreement and Repossession (Lease-Purchase Agreements)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 476-18, Appointment of Agent; Collection or Repossession(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 378-32, Unlawful Suspension, Barring, Discharge, Withholding Pay, Demoting, or Discrimination(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 378-33, Complaint Against Unlawful Suspension, Discharge, or Discrimination (30-Day Deadline)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- HRS 657-16 and 657-17, Repealed (L 1976, c 200) - Hawaii Statutory Debt Revival Provisions(capitol.hawaii.gov)