USA Update: Replevin Actions: What You Should Know

A contractor client recently found itself in a prickly situation. They had default terminated a subcontractor on a major commercial project and withheld payment to that subcontractor on an outstanding invoice as permitted under the terms of the subcontract until the project was completed. Clearly irate over being terminated, the subcontractor walked-off of the project with thousands of dollars’ worth of project materials and equipment that had been paid for by the owner. While on some projects this may amount to nothing more than an annoyance or inconvenience, in this case it was a significant problem because some of the wrongfully removed materials were custom manufactured overseas and not easily replaceable. The client therefore needed to take immediate action to retrieve the stolen materials so that the project would not be delayed. Specifically, it needed to file a replevin action against the subcontractor.

A replevin action is a little known but powerful area of the law. In its simplest terms, replevin is a procedure whereby seized goods may be provisionally restored to their owner pending the outcome of an action to determine the rights of the parties concerned. The requirements of a replevin action differ by jurisdiction. For example, in Pennsylvania, the Rules of Civil Procedure devote an entire section to replevin actions and spell out in precise detail the steps that must be taken. While you should be sure to strictly comply with the rules in your jurisdiction, here are a few general points to keep in mind:

Where to File: A replevin action is typically commenced by filing a complaint in the appropriate jurisdiction. Generally speaking, it is best to file the action in the jurisdiction where the improperly seized materials are being held. If that location is unknown, you can also typically file the action in the jurisdiction where the project is located.

The Complaint: The complaint in replevin typically must include: (i) a description of the property to be replevied; (ii) its value; (iii) its location if known; and (iv) the material facts upon which the claim is based – in other words, why the filing party is entitled to seize the property that has been taken. The complaint generally must be verified by the filing party upon personal knowledge or information and belief.

• Writs of Seizure: When time is of the essence or there is a concern that the removed materials will be harmed or destroyed by the holding party, most jurisdictions allow for the sheriff to seize the property pursuant to a writ of seizure. In general, a writ of seizure is issued upon an order of court entered upon notice and a hearing during which the moving party must establish through the complaint, affidavits, testimony, admissions or other evidence, that it has a high probability of successfully demonstrating its claim to possession of the subject materials.
• double the value of the materials). In some instances, a counterbond may be filed with the court by a defendant or intervenor claiming the right to possession of the property.
• Final Judgment: Following service of the complaint, a judgment may be entered by the court either before or after a trial. The judgment will determine which party has the right to retain possession of the property and any special damages to be awarded to the plaintiff or the defendant resulting from an improper claim to possession of the property. Typically, if a trial is necessary to determine the amount of special damages, if any, the trial will be a bench trial rather than a jury trial.

In the case of our contractor client, the replevin action was a complete success. Following an evidentiary hearing, the judge entered an order granting our Emergency Motion for the Issuance of a Writ of Seizure and directing the prothonotary (Pennsylvania’s name for the court clerk) to issue a Writ of Seizure to the sheriff’s office commanding him to take possession of the project materials upon the posting of a bond. After complying with the necessary procedural requirements, we were accompanied by several uniformed police officers to retrieve the wrongfully removed project materials from the subcontractor’s warehouse. The materials were then transported to the project and immediately put into use. The whole process took weeks rather than the months (or more) it may have taken for the client to obtain suitable replacement materials.

If you ever find yourself in the unfortunate position of needing to retrieve wrongfully removed project materials or equipment from a terminated contractor or subcontractor, the replevin action is a very useful tool to keep in mind. Be sure to strictly follow the procedural requirements in your jurisdiction and you may end up retrieving your wrongfully removed items in relatively short order.

By Craig H. O’Neill, White and Williams, US, a Transatlantic Law International Affiliated Firm. 

For further information or for any assistance please contact us@transatlanticlaw.com

Disclaimer: Transatlantic Law International Limited is a UK registered limited liability company providing international business and legal solutions through its own resources and the expertise of over 105 affiliated independent law firms in over 95 countries worldwide. This article is for background information only and provided in the context of the applicable law when published and does not constitute legal advice and cannot be relied on as such for any matter. Legal advice may be provided subject to the retention of Transatlantic Law International Limited’s services and its governing terms and conditions of service. Transatlantic Law International Limited, based at 42 Brook Street, London W1K 5DB, United Kingdom, is registered with Companies House, Reg Nr. 361484, with its registered address at 83 Cambridge Street, London SW1V 4PS, United Kingdom.