Case Name: REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, Appellant, v. Ernest L. SARTAIN and Carmen Sartain, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1980-06-10
Citations: 384 So. 2d 271
Docket Number: No. 79-1899
Parties: REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, Appellant, v. Ernest L. SARTAIN and Carmen Sartain, Appellees.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and SCHWARTZ, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 384
Pages: 271–271

Head Matter:
REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, Appellant, v. Ernest L. SARTAIN and Carmen Sartain, Appellees.
No. 79-1899.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
June 10, 1980.
Paul, Landy, Beiley & Harper and Lawrence R. Metsch, Miami, for appellant.
Wakefield, Hewitt & Webster and Garth A. Webster, Miami, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and SCHWARTZ, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The final judgment on garnishment under review is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the trial court had personal jurisdiction over the garnishee [United Postal Savings Association] as said garnishee filed an answer to the writ of garnishment herein directed to the merits of said writ, and, consequently, made a general appearance in the cause; McKelvey v. McKelvey, 323 So.2d 651, 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); 13 Fla. Jur.2d "Creditors' Rights" § 63 (1979); and (b) the garnishors' [Ernest and Carmen Sar-tain] failure to file a traverse had no legal consequence in this cause. See Florida Steel Corp. v. A. G. Spanos Enterprises, Inc., 332 So.2d 663 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); § 77.06(3), 77.061, Fla.Stat. (1979).
Affirmed.
. We assume without deciding that the appellant Republic National Bank has standing to raise the points urged on appeal.