Case summary: Fowkes & Hasanbasic filed a federal lawsuit on September 24, 2026, alleging that Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC repeatedly used Florida’s garnishment process against a consumer’s wages after accepting a court-approved payoff of the underlying judgment. The complaint asserts claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Florida common law.
The action, Fortune v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, Case No. 8:26-cv-02917, is pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Paul R. Fowkes and Ryan C. Hasanbasic represent the plaintiff.
The complaint contains allegations that have not yet been adjudicated. Portfolio Recovery Associates has not been found liable and will have the opportunity to respond in court.
A Court-Approved Payoff Allegedly Ended the Judgment in 2023
According to the complaint, Portfolio Recovery Associates obtained a judgment against Barbara Fortune in 2015. In April 2023, the parties resolved a continuing wage garnishment through a stipulated final judgment. That court-approved agreement required Fortune’s employer, Walgreens, to transmit a lump-sum payment that would pay off the judgment.
The complaint alleges that Walgreens issued the required payment, Portfolio Recovery Associates accepted and deposited it on May 17, 2023, and the judgment was therefore paid in full under the parties’ agreement.
The Complaint Alleges Repeated Garnishments After the Payoff
The lawsuit alleges that the collection activity did not end with the payoff. Instead, Portfolio Recovery Associates allegedly continued using the garnishment process against Fortune’s Walgreens wages.
The complaint describes three distinct periods of post-payoff garnishment activity:
- 2023: Walgreens allegedly withheld an additional $2,693.81 from Fortune’s wages after Portfolio Recovery Associates accepted the agreed payoff.
- 2024: Fortune filed a sworn claim of exemption explaining that the judgment had already been resolved. Portfolio Recovery Associates allegedly did not contest the claim, and the writ of garnishment was dissolved on August 29, 2024.
- 2026: Portfolio Recovery Associates allegedly returned to court and represented that $592.37, plus garnishment costs and interest, remained unpaid. A new writ was issued to Walgreens, and additional wages were withheld.
The complaint further alleges that Fortune sent Portfolio Recovery Associates the 2023 stipulated judgment in August 2026. Portfolio Recovery Associates then provided an account statement showing a zero balance and filed a satisfaction of judgment, but the garnishment remained in place and Walgreens continued withholding wages.
Emergency Motion Prompted Dismissal of the Garnishment
On September 21, 2026, Fortune filed an emergency motion in the state-court garnishment proceeding. The motion sought to dissolve the writ, discharge Walgreens, return the withheld wages, and end any further garnishment on the paid judgment.
According to the federal complaint, Portfolio Recovery Associates voluntarily dismissed the garnishment less than twenty-four hours after the emergency motion was filed and directed that the withheld funds be returned to Fortune.
Federal Claims Under the FDCPA
The complaint alleges that the 2026 collection activity violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Among other things, the lawsuit alleges that Portfolio Recovery Associates attempted to collect an amount that was not owed, misrepresented the legal status and amount of the debt, and used unfair or unconscionable means to collect it.
The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using false, deceptive, misleading, unfair, or abusive practices in connection with consumer debts. Whether a particular collection effort violates the statute depends on the communications, court filings, account records, payment history, and other facts involved.
Florida Wrongful-Garnishment Claim
The lawsuit also asserts a Florida common-law claim for wrongful garnishment. It alleges that Portfolio Recovery Associates lacked probable cause to pursue garnishment after accepting the court-approved payoff and nevertheless repeatedly invoked the garnishment process against Fortune’s wages.
The complaint seeks actual and statutory damages under the FDCPA, compensatory and consequential damages, punitive damages where permitted, costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief available under law.
What Should a Consumer Do When Wages Are Garnished for a Paid Debt?
A consumer who believes wages are being garnished for a judgment that has already been paid should act promptly. Garnishment deadlines can be short, and an employer may be required to continue withholding wages until the court dissolves the writ or the creditor releases it.
Important records may include:
- The judgment and every subsequent garnishment order
- Settlement agreements or stipulated judgments
- Proof of payment, including cancelled checks and payment ledgers
- Wage statements showing the amounts withheld
- Claims of exemption, motions, notices, and court orders
- Communications with the creditor, debt collector, creditor’s attorney, and employer
- Any account statement showing a zero balance or satisfaction of judgment
A satisfaction of judgment may be important evidence, but it does not necessarily stop an active wage withholding by itself. The writ or garnishment proceeding may also need to be formally dissolved, dismissed, or released.
F&H Law Group Represents Consumers in Debt-Collection Cases
Fowkes & Hasanbasic represents Florida consumers in cases involving unlawful debt-collection activity, wrongful wage garnishment, credit-reporting errors, and other consumer-protection violations. The firm’s attorneys evaluate the underlying judgment, collection history, court filings, payment records, and resulting financial and emotional harm.
If a debt collector is attempting to garnish your wages for an obligation you already paid, contact F&H Law Group through our online contact page or call (727) 500-1010 for a free case review.
About the Attorneys
Paul R. Fowkes and Ryan C. Hasanbasic are the founding shareholders of Fowkes & Hasanbasic, P.A., also known as F&H Law Group. They represent consumers in federal and state litigation throughout Florida.
This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. The allegations summarized above are drawn from the complaint in a pending lawsuit. No court has determined that Portfolio Recovery Associates is liable for the alleged conduct.