Yes, you can garnish a debtor’s wages to collect on an elder or dependent adult financial abuse judgment in California by filing Judicial Council Form EJ-185, the Application for Earnings Withholding Order for Elder or Dependent Adult Financial Abuse. This specialized application unlocks an enhanced wage garnishment that can reach a much larger slice of the abuser’s paycheck than a standard creditor’s order under California Code of Civil Procedure §706.052.
According to the California Department of Justice’s elder abuse data, reported financial elder abuse losses in California exceed $1.8 billion per year, and only a small fraction of victims ever recover any money. Filing Form EJ-185 correctly is one of the few tools that actually moves dollars from an abuser’s paycheck into a victim’s pocket, which is why every line on the form matters.
Here is what you will learn in this guide:
- 📝 How to fill out every box on Form EJ-185, line by line, with named examples
- ⚖️ Why the elder abuse garnishment under CCP §706.052 hits harder than a standard wage levy
- 📂 Which companion forms (WG-002, WG-004, WG-005, WG-035) you must file with EJ-185
- 🚫 The seven most common mistakes that get applications rejected by the levying officer
- 💰 How to calculate the maximum withholding using the 2026 California minimum wage of \$16.50/hour
What Form EJ-185 Actually Is
California Judicial Council Form EJ-185 is the formal Application for Issuance of Earnings Withholding Order for Elder or Dependent Adult Financial Abuse. The form lets a judgment creditor ask the court clerk or levying officer (usually the county sheriff or marshal) to issue an Earnings Withholding Order against a person who has been found liable for financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult.
The plain-English version is this. You sued someone for stealing from an elder or dependent adult, you won a money judgment, and now you want to take part of the abuser’s paycheck until the judgment is paid. The consequence of not using EJ-185 (and using the standard WG-001 instead) is that you are stuck with the ordinary 25% federal cap under 15 U.S.C. §1673, instead of the supercharged formula that California reserves for elder abuse judgments.
A common misconception is that EJ-185 creates the garnishment. It does not. The form is only the application. The actual order that goes to the employer is the Earnings Withholding Order (Form WG-002) or its elder-abuse cousin, which the levying officer issues after the application is approved.
A real-world example helps. Maria, a court-appointed conservator for her 82-year-old mother, won a \$240,000 judgment against a former in-home caregiver who drained the mother’s bank accounts. Maria files EJ-185 with the Santa Clara County Sheriff so the caregiver’s wages at his new job can be garnished at the higher elder-abuse rate, rather than the standard creditor rate.
Statutory Roots
The form draws its authority from California Welfare & Institutions Code §15610.30, which defines financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult. It also leans on CCP §706.052, the statute that authorizes a separate, more aggressive withholding formula for these judgments.
The plain-English meaning is that the Legislature decided abusers of vulnerable adults should not enjoy the same paycheck protection as a typical debtor. The consequence of this policy choice is that more of the abuser’s gross wages are exposed to garnishment, sometimes more than double what a credit card creditor could grab.
A common misconception is that this enhanced garnishment also applies to any elder-related civil judgment, such as a slip-and-fall claim by a 70-year-old plaintiff. It does not. The judgment must be specifically based on financial abuse as defined under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act.
Who Can File It
The applicant must be the judgment creditor named in the underlying judgment, or that creditor’s attorney of record. A conservator, guardian, trustee, or personal representative may also file if the judgment is in the name of the protected person’s estate, as recognized in Probate Code §2462.
The consequence of filing when you are not the proper party is rejection by the clerk or, worse, a void order that the debtor can later attack. James, an adult son who paid his father’s legal fees but never substituted in as a party, tried to file EJ-185 in his own name and had it kicked back because only his father (the named creditor) had standing.
Before You Touch the Form: The Five Things You Need
You cannot draft EJ-185 cold. You need five anchor documents and data points in front of you, or your application will fail.
First, you need the file-stamped judgment itself, which must expressly state that liability arose from elder or dependent adult financial abuse. Second, you need a current Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest (Form MC-012), because the levying officer needs the exact unpaid balance with interest. Third, you need the abuser’s employer name and address. Fourth, you need a Writ of Execution (Form EJ-130) issued within the last 180 days. Fifth, you need the levying officer’s filing fee, currently \$40 in most counties under the Government Code §26721 fee schedule.
The consequence of missing any one of these is delay. Linda, a small-claims judgment creditor, mailed her EJ-185 to the Los Angeles County Sheriff without a current writ of execution, and the sheriff returned the whole packet two weeks later, costing her a full pay cycle of garnishment.
A common misconception is that interest accrues automatically at the levying officer’s end. It does not. The officer takes the balance you give them on MC-012, so understating accrued interest at 10% per year under CCP §685.010 means leaving real money on the table.
Locating the Employer
You cannot garnish wages if you do not know where the debtor works. Common discovery tools include a Judgment Debtor Examination (Form EJ-125), post-judgment interrogatories under CCP §708.020, and skip-trace databases.
The consequence of guessing the employer is that the Earnings Withholding Order gets served on the wrong company, the order is returned unserved, and your fee is partially or fully forfeited. Carlos, a creditor in Orange County, assumed his debtor still worked at the same restaurant chain and lost his \$40 fee plus three weeks of garnishment because the debtor had switched employers months earlier.
A common misconception is that the Employment Development Department will hand over employer records to private creditors. It will not, because Unemployment Insurance Code §1094 makes those records confidential except in narrow government uses.
Filling Out EJ-185 Line By Line
Open the official PDF of Form EJ-185 and follow along. Every caption and box below tracks the form as revised by the Judicial Council of California.
The Caption Block (Top of Page 1)
The caption identifies the lawyer or self-represented party, the court, and the case. In the top-left box, enter the attorney or party without attorney, including name, State Bar number, address, phone, fax, and email. If you are self-represented, write In Pro Per on the State Bar line.
The plain-English point is that everything in this block tells the clerk where to send back-stamped copies and where to send objections from the debtor. The consequence of using a stale address is that you miss a Claim of Exemption (Form WG-006) filed by the debtor and lose by default at the exemption hearing.
A real-world example: Priscilla, a Sacramento attorney, used her old office address on EJ-185 and never received the debtor’s claim of exemption. She missed the 10-day window under CCP §706.124 and the garnishment was released.
A common misconception is that email service is automatic for judgment enforcement. It is not, because California Rules of Court, Rule 2.251 requires consent to electronic service in most enforcement matters.
Court Name and Case Information
Right below the attorney block, fill in the name of the superior court, the street and mailing address, and the branch name. Then add the plaintiff (the elder, the conservator, or the People), the defendant (the abuser), the case number, and the judge.
Plain English: the levying officer needs to know which courthouse stamped the judgment so they can verify it. The consequence of citing the wrong branch (for example, listing the Stanley Mosk Courthouse when the judgment was entered in the Pomona branch) is rejection of the application because the underlying file cannot be matched.
Rebecca, a creditor with a 2024 judgment from the Riverside County Superior Court’s Indio branch, mistakenly listed the main Riverside courthouse on EJ-185 and had the application bounced back by the levying officer until she corrected it.
Item 1 — Judgment Creditor Information
Item 1 asks for the judgment creditor’s name and last known address. If you are a conservator or guardian, list yourself and indicate the capacity, for example, Maria Lopez, as Conservator of the Estate of Elena Lopez.
The consequence of dropping the representative capacity is that the levying officer treats Maria personally as the creditor, which can create future tax and accounting headaches. A common misconception is that you can use a P.O. Box. You can, but only if it is the address you actually receive legal mail at, because the Probate Code §1820 requires meaningful notice.
Item 2 — Judgment Debtor Information
Item 2 demands the debtor’s full legal name, last known residence address, and Social Security number if known. The Social Security number is not mandatory but greatly helps the employer match payroll records.
The consequence of an incomplete name (for example, J. Smith instead of Jonathan Adam Smith) is that the employer cannot identify the worker and returns the order unsatisfied under CCP §706.122.
A real-world example: David, a Fresno judgment creditor, listed only D. Garcia on his EJ-185 because that is how the judgment read. The employer had four Garcias on payroll and rejected the order until David filed an amended application with the full name.
A common misconception is that the Social Security number must be redacted on EJ-185 under the Rules of Court, Rule 1.20. It must be redacted on the public-record copy, but the levying officer’s working copy may include it.
Item 3 — The Underlying Judgment
Item 3 is where you identify the judgment. Provide the date of entry, the total amount of the judgment, and a statement that the judgment is based on liability for elder or dependent adult financial abuse under Welfare & Institutions Code §15657.5 or §15610.30.
The plain-English point is that the levying officer is not a judge and cannot guess whether the judgment qualifies for the enhanced formula, so you must say so on the form. The consequence of omitting this statement is that the officer issues a standard WG-002 rather than the elder-abuse version, and you lose the enhanced collection power.
Anthony, an attorney in San Diego, won a \$95,000 abuse judgment but checked the wrong box on EJ-185, so the sheriff issued a regular wage order. Anthony had to refile, costing his client another month of collection delay.
A common misconception is that punitive damages awarded under Civil Code §3294 cannot be collected through EJ-185. They can, as long as they were awarded in the same elder abuse judgment.
Item 4 — Current Amount Owed
Item 4 totals the unpaid balance: original judgment, plus accrued interest at 10% under CCP §685.010, plus added post-judgment costs under CCP §685.070, minus credits.
For example, a \$100,000 judgment entered on January 1, 2024 and unpaid through May 19, 2026 has accrued roughly \$24,000 in simple interest, bringing the balance to about \$124,000 before costs. The consequence of misstating the balance is either over-collection (which the debtor can sue you for under CCP §706.154) or under-collection (which leaves money uncollected).
A common misconception is that interest stops once the writ issues. It does not. Interest accrues until the judgment is satisfied, which is why creditors update the MC-012 periodically.
Item 5 — Employer Information
Item 5 captures the debtor’s employer’s legal name, address, and the address of the payroll office if different. If the employer is a national chain, use the payroll address, not the local store address, so the order actually lands on the right desk.
The consequence of serving the local manager rather than the payroll office is delay. Sandra, a Los Angeles creditor, served EJ-185 on her debtor’s local coffee shop manager instead of the corporate payroll center in Seattle, and three weeks of paychecks slipped by before the order was processed.
A common misconception is that the IRS Employer Identification Number is required. It is not on EJ-185, but providing it speeds up matching at large payroll processors like ADP and Paychex.
Item 6 — Statutory Basis Declaration
Item 6 is where you check the box stating the judgment is based on financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult. This is the enhanced-formula trigger.
The plain-English consequence of checking this box is that the levying officer applies CCP §706.052’s special calculation, which can reach earnings above 40 times the state minimum wage, instead of the federal 25% cap.
Wendy, a creditor in Alameda County, forgot to check this box and her debtor’s paycheck was garnished at only \$220 per pay period instead of the \$640 she should have collected. She had to file an amended application to fix it.
Item 7 — Verification and Signature
The applicant or attorney signs under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California. The date and place of signing must be filled in.
The consequence of signing falsely is criminal liability under Penal Code §118, plus civil sanctions under CCP §128.7. A common misconception is that a non-lawyer cannot sign under penalty of perjury. They can, and they must, if they are the judgment creditor in pro per.
Three Common Scenarios
Below are the three most common fact patterns that drive creditors to file EJ-185, shown as two-column tables of Creditor Step and Practical Outcome.
Scenario A — Conservator vs. Former Caregiver
| Creditor Step | Practical Outcome |
|---|---|
| Conservator wins \$180,000 judgment under WIC §15657.5 | Judgment is presumptively an elder abuse judgment |
| Files EJ-185 with sheriff plus current EJ-130 | Sheriff issues elder-abuse Earnings Withholding Order |
| Caregiver earns \$1,400/week at hospital | Garnishment captures up to \$740/week instead of \$350 |
| Hospital remits to sheriff every pay period | Funds disbursed to conservator under CCP §706.026 |
Scenario B — Adult Child vs. Sibling Who Drained Mother’s Trust
| Creditor Step | Practical Outcome |
|---|---|
| Sibling files Probate Code §859 double-damages action | Court enters \$600,000 elder abuse judgment |
| Successor trustee files EJ-185 in trustee capacity | Levying officer issues order to debtor’s law firm employer |
| Debtor-attorney earns \$10,000/month | Sheriff withholds maximum allowed under CCP §706.052 |
| Debtor files WG-006 claim of exemption | Court holds hearing; reduced or denied per debtor’s necessities |
Scenario C — Bank as Assignee of Elder Abuse Judgment
| Creditor Step | Practical Outcome |
|---|---|
| Bank takes assignment of judgment under CCP §673 | Bank steps into elder’s shoes as judgment creditor |
| Files EJ-185 plus Notice of Assignment | Levying officer recognizes bank’s standing |
| Debtor changes jobs mid-garnishment | Bank serves new EJ-185 within 180 days of new writ |
| Debtor files bankruptcy | Elder abuse debt is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(4) |
Named-Person Walkthrough Examples
Three more named examples show how the form behaves in practice.
Olivia is a private fiduciary in San Mateo County who serves as conservator for an 88-year-old client. She won a \$310,000 judgment against a niece who forged signatures on bank checks. Olivia files EJ-185 listing herself as conservator, names the niece’s employer (a regional bakery chain), checks Item 6 to invoke the elder-abuse formula, and attaches a current writ of execution from the San Mateo Superior Court.
Brandon is the surviving spouse of an elderly victim. The original plaintiff died after judgment but before collection. Brandon must first file a Substitution of Successor in Interest (Form MC-356) under CCP §377.32, and only then can he sign EJ-185 as judgment creditor.
Helena, an attorney for a 76-year-old client victimized by a Ponzi scheme, files EJ-185 against the operator’s W-2 employer (a construction company where he now works as a project manager). The Ponzi judgment was based in part on financial elder abuse, and Helena attaches a certified copy of the judgment to prove the statutory basis to the levying officer.
Filing Logistics
You do not file EJ-185 with the court clerk. You file it with the levying officer (the county sheriff or marshal) in the county where the debtor’s employer is located.
The consequence of filing it in the wrong county is administrative chaos. Tomas, a creditor whose debtor worked in Kern County but lived in Los Angeles County, mistakenly filed in Los Angeles, and the LA Sheriff had no jurisdiction to serve the Kern County employer.
A common misconception is that you can email EJ-185 to the sheriff. Most counties still require either in-person, mail, or a county-specific e-submission portal. The Los Angeles County Sheriff Civil Division accepts mail and walk-in submissions; the San Diego County Sheriff Civil Division accepts mail and online.
Required Companion Forms
EJ-185 never travels alone. Attach the following:
- A current Writ of Execution (EJ-130) issued within 180 days
- A certified copy of the underlying judgment
- Memorandum of Costs After Judgment (MC-012) showing accrued interest
- The levying officer’s filing fee (currently \$40 in most counties)
- A self-addressed stamped envelope for return-stamped copies
The consequence of skipping any of these is rejection. Felicia, a Stockton creditor, forgot the certified copy of the judgment, and her packet sat in a sheriff’s intake bin for ten business days before the rejection notice went out.
Service on the Employer
After approval, the sheriff serves the employer with the Earnings Withholding Order (WG-002) plus the Employer’s Instructions (WG-003) and the Employee Instructions and Claim of Exemption forms. The employer has 15 days to deliver the order to the employee under CCP §706.104.
The consequence of an employer ignoring the order is direct liability for the full unpaid amount under CCP §706.154. A common misconception is that the employer can charge a large processing fee. It can only charge the employee \$1.50 per pay period under CCP §706.034.
How Much Can Actually Be Withheld
This is the headline question. The elder-abuse formula in CCP §706.052 lets the levying officer withhold the lesser of:
- 25% of disposable earnings, or
- The amount by which weekly disposable earnings exceed 40 times the state minimum wage, plus an additional amount the court considers proper after weighing the debtor’s basic needs against the elder’s compensable losses
At the 2026 California minimum wage of \$16.50/hour, 40 times the minimum wage equals \$660 per week. Anything above that floor is fair game, subject to the court’s adjustment.
The consequence of this two-pronged formula is that a debtor earning \$2,000 per week in disposable earnings can be hit with garnishment well above \$500 weekly, far exceeding the ordinary creditor cap of \$335. Roger, a debtor in Contra Costa County earning \$2,400 per week net, saw his garnishment rise from \$600 (standard) to \$1,000 (elder abuse) after his creditor properly invoked Item 6.
A common misconception is that Social Security and VA benefits can be reached. They cannot, because federal law under 42 U.S.C. §407 protects them from most garnishments, even elder abuse judgments.
Worked Calculation
Take Vanessa, an abuser earning \$1,500 per week in disposable wages. Under the elder-abuse formula, the levying officer compares 25% of \$1,500 (\$375) to the excess over \$660 (\$840). The smaller of the two would be \$375 under the basic prong, but the court can add an additional amount under CCP §706.052(b), often bringing the actual withholding closer to \$700 weekly when the debtor cannot show hardship.
The consequence of failing to ask the court for the additional amount is that the sheriff defaults to 25%. A common misconception is that this happens automatically. It does not, because the additional amount is a discretionary judicial finding that you must request, typically by noticed motion or at a Claim of Exemption hearing.
Mistakes to Avoid
These are the seven costliest mistakes creditors make on EJ-185:
- Failing to check the elder-abuse box in Item 6, which collapses your enhanced formula into a standard 25% cap
- Using a stale writ of execution older than 180 days, which the sheriff will refuse to act on under CCP §699.530
- Forgetting to attach a certified copy of the judgment, which prevents the levying officer from confirming the statutory basis
- Misstating accrued interest on MC-012, which either over-collects (risking sanctions) or under-collects (leaving money on the table)
- Serving the wrong county sheriff because you confused the debtor’s home county with the employer’s county
- Listing the debtor by initials or nickname instead of full legal name, which lets the employer return the order unsatisfied
- Omitting representative capacity (conservator, trustee, successor in interest) so the order issues in the wrong name and is later voidable
Do’s and Don’ts
The following list captures the highest-leverage habits when filing EJ-185.
- Do update your MC-012 the same day you sign EJ-185, because interest compounds on stale numbers
- Do attach a clean certified copy of the judgment so the sheriff has zero excuse to delay
- Do request the additional amount under CCP §706.052(b), because the enhanced ceiling is meaningless without it
- Do track the 10-day exemption window so you appear at the hearing and protect your collection
- Do serve the employer’s payroll office, not the local supervisor, to avoid losing pay cycles
The following are the don’ts that ruin applications.
- Don’t file with the court clerk; the levying officer is the right destination
- Don’t assume the federal 25% cap controls, because the elder-abuse statute is more generous to the creditor
- Don’t serve EDD or franchise-tax records seeking employer info; those records are protected
- Don’t forget Social Security and VA benefits are off-limits even for elder abuse judgments
- Don’t let an old writ expire; renew it before filing EJ-185
Pros and Cons of Using EJ-185
The form is powerful, but it has tradeoffs.
- Pro: It reaches more of the abuser’s paycheck than a standard creditor’s order under CCP §706.050
- Pro: It signals to the employer that this is a serious elder abuse matter, which often improves compliance
- Pro: It works in tandem with non-dischargeability under 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(4), so bankruptcy will not erase the underlying judgment
- Pro: The application fee is modest at roughly \$40 in most counties
- Pro: Conservators and trustees can file in representative capacity, preserving estate accounting integrity
The cons are real and worth weighing.
- Con: The form requires meticulous attachments and most pro se filers underestimate the paperwork
- Con: The debtor’s Claim of Exemption (WG-006) can reduce the garnishment below the standard 25% if hardship is shown
- Con: Self-employed abusers are unreachable through wage garnishment; you would need an Assignment Order under CCP §708.510 instead
- Con: The order only lasts as long as the debtor stays at that employer; job changes force a new EJ-185
- Con: Some counties’ levying officers are notoriously slow, and there is no statutory deadline for them to act
Key Court Rulings Worth Knowing
Two California Court of Appeal decisions shape how levying officers and trial courts handle elder-abuse garnishments.
In Das v. Bank of America, 186 Cal.App.4th 727 (2010), the court analyzed standing under the Elder Abuse Act and confirmed that the heightened remedies extend to financial abuse claims. The consequence for EJ-185 filers is that Item 6’s elder-abuse box rides on the Das framework, and creditors must make sure their judgment explicitly invokes the Act.
In Stebley v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, 202 Cal.App.4th 522 (2011), the court tightened the requirements for pleading financial abuse, reminding creditors that without a properly framed underlying judgment, the enhanced garnishment formula will not attach. The common misconception is that any judgment involving an elderly plaintiff qualifies. It does not.
Trial courts also lean on CCP §706.105 when ruling on exemption claims. The practical lesson for EJ-185 filers is to anticipate exemption hearings and bring proof of the victim’s compensable losses to justify a higher additional amount.
Federal vs. California Wage Garnishment
Federal law sets a floor; California elder abuse law goes further.
| Feature | Federal (CCPA) | California Elder Abuse (CCP §706.052) |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum % of disposable earnings | 25% under 15 U.S.C. §1673 | 25% plus discretionary additional amount |
| Floor below which no garnishment | 30× federal minimum wage (\$217.50/wk) | 40× state minimum wage (\$660/wk in 2026) |
| Trigger | Any money judgment | Judgment for elder/dependent adult abuse |
| Application form | Varies by state | EJ-185 |
| Underlying authority | CCPA Title III | Elder Abuse Act |
The consequence of relying on federal numbers alone in California is that you under-garnish. The common misconception that federal law preempts state garnishment is wrong; federal law sets a minimum protection, not a ceiling on state enforcement against abusers.
Key Entities Involved
Several institutional players touch every EJ-185 filing.
The Judicial Council of California drafts and updates the form itself. The county sheriff or marshal acts as the levying officer who issues the actual withholding order. The California Department of Justice Bureau of Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse collects abuse data and sometimes intervenes in egregious cases.
Private fiduciaries licensed by the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau routinely sign EJ-185 in conservator capacity. The California Bar’s Elder Abuse practice area supplies the lawyers who appear at exemption hearings. The California Employment Development Department is not a player you can lean on for employer information, given confidentiality under UIC §1094.
A common misconception is that Adult Protective Services can file EJ-185 for a victim. It cannot, because APS is an investigative and protective agency, not a creditor.
After the Order Issues: What to Expect
Once the levying officer serves the employer, the first paycheck withholding usually appears within one to two pay cycles. Funds flow from employer to levying officer to creditor.
The debtor has 10 days from receiving the Employee Instructions (WG-005) to file a Claim of Exemption (WG-006). The creditor then has 10 days to oppose with a Notice of Opposition (WG-009), or the exemption is granted by default.
The consequence of skipping the opposition window is a permanent reduction of your garnishment. Patrick, a Riverside creditor, missed the 10-day window because his attorney was on vacation, and his \$650 weekly withholding dropped to \$180 for the remainder of the debtor’s employment.
A common misconception is that the order remains live indefinitely. It actually terminates when the judgment is satisfied, when the debtor leaves the employer, or by court order on a successful claim of exemption.
FAQs
Is Form EJ-185 the same as Form WG-001?
No. EJ-185 is the specialized application reserved for elder or dependent adult financial abuse judgments under CCP §706.052. WG-001 is the general creditor application that yields only the standard 25% wage cap.
Can a self-represented creditor file EJ-185?
Yes. Any judgment creditor, including a conservator, trustee, or pro se plaintiff, can sign and file EJ-185 with the county levying officer, as long as the underlying judgment names them as the creditor or representative.
Do I file EJ-185 with the court clerk?
No. EJ-185 is filed with the levying officer (sheriff or marshal) in the county where the debtor’s employer is located, not with the superior court clerk who entered the judgment.
Does Social Security income count as wages for EJ-185?
No. Social Security and most federal benefits are protected by 42 U.S.C. §407 and cannot be garnished even on an elder abuse judgment, although mixed accounts can sometimes be reached.
Can punitive damages from the elder abuse case be collected via EJ-185?
Yes. Punitive damages awarded in the same elder abuse judgment under Civil Code §3294 are collectible through EJ-185 alongside compensatory damages and statutory attorney’s fees.
Is there a fee to file EJ-185?
Yes. Most California counties charge approximately \$40 as a levying officer fee, which is recoverable from the debtor as a post-judgment cost under CCP §685.070.
Can I file EJ-185 against a self-employed abuser?
No. Wage garnishment requires a W-2 employer. For self-employed debtors, creditors must use a separate Assignment Order under CCP §708.510 to capture receivables.
Will bankruptcy stop an EJ-185 garnishment?
No. Elder abuse judgments are typically non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(4) and §523(a)(6), so the garnishment usually resumes after the automatic stay lifts.
How long does an Earnings Withholding Order issued from EJ-185 last?
Yes, it lasts until the judgment is paid, the debtor leaves the employer, or the court terminates it. Job changes require a fresh EJ-185 and a current writ of execution within 180 days.
Can the debtor reduce the garnishment by claiming hardship?
Yes. A debtor may file Form WG-006 within 10 days, and the court can reduce the withholding based on basic necessities under CCP §706.105.
Does the elder victim need to be alive to use EJ-185?
Yes and No. No, the victim does not need to be alive; the successor in interest or the estate may step in under CCP §377.32 after the proper substitution paperwork is filed.
Can EJ-185 be used to garnish a federal employee?
Yes. Federal civilian wages are reachable under 5 U.S.C. §5520a, although service goes through the federal agency’s designated payroll office rather than a private employer.
Related reading
- How to Fill Out California Form EA-100 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form EJ-130 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form EJ-152 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form EJ-160 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form EJ-195 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form WG-001 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form CIV-010 (w/Examples) + FAQs