Phillips v. Phillips
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BROCK, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff concedes that prospective wages are not subject to garnishment for alimony under North Carolina law; however, plaintiff contends that defendant’s military retirement pay does not constitute wages or the equivalent of wages, but instead is an annuity and a vested property right of the defendant, or a debt owed the defendant by the United States, and therefore is subject to garnishment. We disagree.
At issue is the nature of military retirement pay. Plaintiff correctly argues that whether such pay constitutes wages not subject to garnishment, or a debt or vested…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Goodley v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971
- Watson v. WatsonDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1976
3Cited by4 opinions
- Craver v. CraverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Sturgill v. SturgillCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Armstrong v. ArmstrongCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Elmwood v. ElmwoodCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977