Does anyone have any suggestions? comments?
- I domicile in New York state, and in a workers compensation hearing,
I asked the opposition and the judge to produce the law which states
that Workers Compensation is garnishable for child support. When they
take out child support they leave me with about 25% of the benefit.
This is what I was given:
Sec. 32-a NEW YORK WORKERS' COMPENSATION HANDBOOK  STATS-
§ 33. Assignments; Exemptions.
Compensation or benefits due under this chapter shall not be
assigned, released or commuted except as provided by this chapter,
and shall be exempt from all claims of creditors and from levy,
execution and attachment or other remedy for recovery or collection
of a debt, which exemption may not be waived provided, however, that
compensation or benefits other than payments pursuant to section
thirteen of this chapter shall be subject to application to an income
execution or order for support enforcement pursuant to section fifty-
two hundred forty-one or fifty-two hundred forty-two of the _civil
practice law and rules. Compensation and benefits shall be paid only
to employees or their dependents, except as hereinafter in this
1. My Questions are shall and may donot mean the same thing, but in
Blacks Law Dictionary 6th edition page 979, it states that the
context in which the word "may" appears must be controlling factor.
Otherwise it means optional or discretional and not mandatory action
or conduct. Does this section use may clearly in a mandatory sense,
and What other ideas could I use that shall or may help me out.......
2. The Child support order was active before I went out on workers
comp, Should there be an order which specifies that workers comp has
to be garnished?
- The red amendment and latest cases from Supreme court
are going to be discussed tomorrow (Sunday) by Melody
Gillespie, Bobby Loman, and LB Bork at 3 pm pacific
time on first amendmentradio.com.
Sunday - 3pm pacific time (6pm eastern, 5 central, 4
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football