The action of replevin may be maintained to recover any goods or chattels in which the plaintiff has a general or special property interest with a right to immediate possession and which are wrongfully detained from him in any manner, together with the damages for such wrongful detention.
(1949 Rev., S. 8251; P.A. 82-160, S. 202.)
History: P.A. 82-160 made minor changes in wording.
See Sec. 42a-2-716(3) re goods identified to sales contract.
Replevin is governed by statute rather than by rules of the common-law action of the same name. 66 C. 547. Action of replevin examined and explained. 14 C. 114. Review of various changes in legislation. 38 C. 249. If cattle lawfully impounded are unlawfully detained by the poundkeeper, the impounder is not liable in this action. 24 C. 361. Prior to 1875 revision, replevin would not lie for property taken on execution; 39 C. 213; 41 C. 321; 44 C. 176, 177; but statute, as then revised, embraces chattels held on an execution. 49 C. 112, 113. Right to immediate possession was necessary at common law; 42 C. 76; 60 C. 465; otherwise by statute. 42 C. 76. When previous demand unnecessary. 42 C. 425; 86 C. 372; 105 C. 677. Replevin is maintainable by a receiptor of goods attached. 45 C. 109. Not maintainable by purchaser of stolen goods against officer holding them for identification. Id., 548. Replevin does not lie for liquors seized for condemnation; 48 C. 200; nor for liquors kept to be sold in violation of law. 49 C. 164. Effect of acquiring right to the property pending suit. 51 C. 176. Lies only for specific, distinguishable property. 54 C. 318. When money is not repleviable. 66 C. 511. Lies to recover liquor license; 74 C. 392; to recover goods fraudulently obtained. 73 C. 547. Does not lie to recover real fixture; 75 C. 170; nor can mortgagee out of possession recover fixture severed by mortgagor. 72 C. 464. It does not lie where possession was originally secured lawfully and has not become unlawful. 83 C. 159. Lies against several where one defendant refuses delivery and others claim under him; 77 C. 462; but not where each claims different portion of goods. 86 C. 372. Bringing of action by seller of goods as rescission of sale; proof of claim in bankruptcy for part of goods sold as defense to replevin of rest. 91 C. 482. Quaere, whether writ lies for goods already held under another replevin writ. Id., 320. Effect of abandonment of replevin action. 99 C. 265. Defendant not entitled to damages unless he counterclaims; amount of damages. 101 C. 60. Demand unnecessary where conditional vendor has right to immediate possession. 105 C. 677. Owner entitled to damages for loss of use of automobile wrongfully replevied. 108 C. 526. Verdict set aside for refusal to award any damages; and for awarding excessive damages. 100 C. 97, 99. Plaintiff must rely on strength of his title rather than weakness of defendant's and must prove a right to immediate possession. 135 C. 517. Power of sale gives chattel mortgagee a right of general property and replevin lies. 137 C. 145. Depreciation in value during period of detention is proper element of damages, but right to such damages ceases on termination of the detention. 152 C. 695. Plaintiff did not, as a matter of statutory law, have right to immediate personal possession of pathology slides. 246 C. 45.
Court lacked a legal basis on which to grant opportunity to redeem, repurchase or bond goods or chattels subject to replevin because an action of replevin is purely statutory, not equitable, in nature. 105 CA 749.
Notes of Decisions
ATC P'ship v. Town of Windham, 845 A.2d 389 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 17× “The defendants claim that the Appellate Court improperly concluded that there was insufficient evidence in the record to support the trial court’s determination that the plaintiff could not maintain an action for statutory replevin, brought pursuant to General Statutes § 52-515,…”
Cornelio v. Stamford Hosp., 717 A.2d 140 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 10× “Thereafter, the plaintiff brought this action for replevin against the defendant pursuant to General Statutes § 52-515 3 seeking possession of the slides and damages.”
Shawmut Bank, N.A. v. Valley Farms, 610 A.2d 652 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 6× “The principal issue in this appeal is the constitutionality, under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution, of our statutory scheme regarding the action of *362 replevin codified in General Statutes § 52-515 et seq. The defendant…”
Ion Bank v. J.C.C. Custom Homes, LLC, 206 A.3d 208 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 52-515 provides: "The action of replevin may be maintained to recover any goods or chattels in which the plaintiff has a general or special property interest with a right to immediate possession and which are wrongfully detained from him in any manner,…”
QuesTech Fin., LLC v. Benni's, LLC, 939 A.2d 1220 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008).
· cites it 6× “The plaintiff thereafter filed a replevin action pursuant to General Statutes § 52-515, seeking the immediate possession of the collateral in the defendant’s possession.”
Vossbrinck v. Eckert Seamans Cherin, & Mellott, LLC, 301 F. Supp. 3d 381 (D. Conn. 2018).
· cites it 2× “Vossbrinck"), brings this action against Defendant Eckert Seamans Cherin and Mellott, LLC ("Defendant" or "Eckert Seamans") for claims of replevin under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-515 , civil theft under Conn.”
ATC P'ship v. Town of Windham, 802 A.2d 210 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 7× “t the plaintiffs property was not wrongfully detained because the defendant town of Windham (town) seized that property pursuant to an alias tax warrant, (2) concluded that the replevin action was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and (3) concluded that because the…”
Tarro v. Mastriani Realty, LLC, 69 A.3d 956 (Conn. App. Ct. 2013).
· cites it 2× “See General Statutes § 52-515. Similarly, the allegations underpinning the civil action are that the defendants acted, either intentionally or negligently, to deprive the plaintiffs of access to the subject premises and to their personal property.”
Matter of Bosson, 432 F. Supp. 1013 (D. Conn. 1977).
· cites it 2× “See generally Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 52-515 et seq. It is not so restricted in its availability as specific performance ( see discussion infra ), and is maintainable once goods have become identified to the contract.”
Angrave v. Oates, 876 A.2d 1287 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 52-515 provides that “[t]he action of replevin may be maintained to recover any goods or chattels in which the plaintiff has a general or special property interest with a right to immediate possession and which are wrongfully detained from him in any manner,…”
Stamatopoulos v. ECS North Am., LLC, 159 A.3d 233 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Thus, the court's unchallenged finding that the plaintiff failed to prove an ownership interest in the Tag-A-Long is wholly dispositive of the plaintiff's claims regardless of whether the defendant was a good faith purchaser for value.”
Staub v. Anderson, 211 A.2d 691 (Conn. 1965).
“Section 52-515 of the General Statutes authorizes the recovery of damages for such a wrongful detention as occurred in this case.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.