Legal Definitions - writ of attachment

A writ of attachment is a legal order issued by a court that allows a plaintiff (the person or entity bringing a lawsuit) to temporarily seize or place a lien on a defendant's (the person or entity being sued) property *before* the lawsuit has been fully decided. The primary purpose of a writ of attachment is to ensure that if the plaintiff ultimately wins the case, there will be sufficient assets available from the defendant to satisfy the judgment and pay the awarded damages. It prevents a defendant from selling, hiding, or transferring assets to avoid paying what they might owe.

Courts do not issue writs of attachment without careful consideration. The plaintiff must typically demonstrate a strong likelihood of winning their case and show a specific, compelling reason why the attachment is necessary, such as a credible risk that the defendant might dispose of their assets before a judgment can be enforced. Crucially, the defendant's due process rights are protected, usually requiring a court hearing where the defendant can present their side before the writ is issued. In many cases, the plaintiff is also required to post a bond, which serves as a financial guarantee to compensate the defendant if the writ is later found to have been wrongly issued and caused the defendant harm.

Here are some examples of how a writ of attachment might apply:

• Commercial Debt with Asset Dissipation Risk:

  Imagine "Green Solutions Inc.," a company that manufactures eco-friendly packaging, sues "Rapid Distribution LLC" for a significant unpaid balance on a large order of custom packaging. Green Solutions Inc. learns through reliable sources that Rapid Distribution LLC is actively selling off its company vehicles and warehouse equipment at below-market prices and transferring funds to accounts outside the country, suggesting an intent to avoid payment. Green Solutions Inc. could petition the court for a writ of attachment on Rapid Distribution LLC's remaining accessible bank accounts or other valuable assets. This action would temporarily freeze those assets, ensuring that if Green Solutions Inc. wins its lawsuit for the unpaid debt, there will be funds available to cover the judgment, rather than finding Rapid Distribution LLC's assets completely gone.

• Contract Dispute Involving Specific Property:

  Consider a situation where a custom furniture maker, "Artisan Woodworks," completes a bespoke dining set for a client, Ms. Eleanor Vance, under a signed contract. Ms. Vance takes possession of the furniture but then refuses to make the final payment, claiming minor aesthetic imperfections, and immediately lists her luxury condominium for sale. Artisan Woodworks believes Ms. Vance is attempting to sell her primary asset and move without paying the outstanding balance. Artisan Woodworks could seek a writ of attachment in the form of a lien on Ms. Vance's condominium. This lien would be recorded against the property, making it difficult or impossible for Ms. Vance to sell the condominium with a clear title until the dispute over the furniture payment is resolved or the lien is satisfied. This ensures that the property, which Ms. Vance owns, remains a potential source of payment for the contract if Artisan Woodworks prevails in court.

• Large Financial Claim Against an Individual with Mobile Assets:

  Suppose Dr. David Chen sues his former business partner, Mr. Robert Kim, for breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of substantial funds from their joint medical practice. Dr. Chen discovers that Mr. Kim has recently purchased a high-value yacht and is making arrangements to sail it to international waters, while also liquidating other significant personal investments. Fearing that Mr. Kim intends to place his assets beyond the reach of U.S. courts, Dr. Chen could request a writ of attachment on the yacht and any remaining accessible financial accounts belonging to Mr. Kim. The court would evaluate Dr. Chen's evidence of misappropriation and Mr. Kim's actions to move assets, and if convinced, would issue the writ to prevent Mr. Kim from removing these valuable assets before a judgment can be rendered and enforced.