Sec. 1. (a) At or after the time of filing a complaint,
the plaintiff may have an attachment against the property of the
defendant, in the cases described in subsection (b) and in the manner
described in this chapter.
(b) The plaintiff may attach property when the action is for the
recovery of money and the defendant:
(1) is, or one (1) of several defendants is, a foreign corporation or
a nonresident of Indiana;
(2) is, or one (1) of several defendants is, secretly leaving or has
left Indiana with intent to defraud:
(A) the defendant's creditors;
(B) the state;
(C) a municipal corporation;
(D) a political subdivision; or
(E) a school corporation (as defined in IC 20-18-2-16(c));
(3) is concealed so that a summons cannot be served upon the
defendant;
(4) is removing or about to remove the defendant's property
subject to execution, or a material part of the property, outside
Indiana, not leaving enough behind to satisfy the plaintiff's claim;
(5) has sold, conveyed, or otherwise disposed of the defendant's
property subject to execution, or permitted the property to be sold
with the fraudulent intent to cheat, hinder, or delay:
(A) the defendant's creditors;
(B) the state;
(C) a municipal corporation;
(D) a political subdivision; or
(E) a school corporation (as defined in IC 20-18-2-16(c)); or
(6) is about to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of the defendant's
property subject to execution with the fraudulent intent to cheat,
hinder, or delay:
(A) the defendant's creditors;
(B) the state;
(C) a municipal corporation;
(D) a political subdivision; or
(E) a school corporation (as defined in IC 20-18-2-16(c)).
(c) The plaintiff is entitled to an attachment for the causes
mentioned in subsection (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) whether the
cause of action is due or not.
[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 34-1-11-1.]
As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.20. Amended by P.L.176-2009,
SEC.22.
Notes of Decisions
Lakes & Rivers Transfer v. Rudolph Robinson Steel Co., 795 N.E.2d 1126 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 4× “Lakes and Rivers, pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 64(B) and Indiana Code section 34-25-2-1, obtained a pretrial ex-parte attachment against Robinson's property.”
Paul v. I.S.I. Servs., Inc., 726 N.E.2d 318 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 3× “CODE §§ 34-25-2-1 to XX-XX-X-XX (1998) (procedures for attachment of defendant's property); IND.”
LAKES & RIVERS TRANSFER v. Rudolph Robinson Steel Co., 736 N.E.2d 285 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 6× “Additionally, Indiana Code section 34-25-2-1 provides that: (a) At or after the time of filing a complaint, the plaintiff may have an attachment against the property of the defendant, in the cases described in subsection (b) and in the manner described in this chapter.”
Vukadinovich v. Posner (N.D. Ind. 2023).
· cites it 23× “Code § 32-18-2-17 (a)(2) incorporates the procedure prescribed by Ind. Code § 34-25-2-1 for the attachment of property.”
In Re Benson, 955 N.E.2d 215 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Co-Alliance requested that the trial court grant prejudgment attachment of the proceeds of any sale pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-25-2-1. On January 7, 2010, the trial court issued an order scheduling a hearing on Co-Alliance's motion for February 22, 2010, and ordering…”
Squibb v. State Ex Rel. Davis, 860 N.E.2d 904 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Ind. Code § 34-25-2-1 (b). 6 . Mrs. Squibb submitted a motion for special findings of fact.”
Benson v. Co-All., LLP, 955 N.E.2d 215 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Co-Alliance requested that the trial court grant prejudgment attachment of the proceeds of any sale pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-25-2-1. On January 7, 2010, the trial court issued an order scheduling a hearing on Co-Alliance’s motion for February 22, 2010, and ordering…”
Busbin v. Excavator's Transp., LLC (S.D. Ind. 2023).
· cites it 4× “July 3, 2023), the court stated in a footnote, "From a cursory review of Indiana Trial Rule 64, it does not appear that provision contains any circumstances for attachment potentially relevant here that are not also found in Ind. Code § 34-25-2-1 . Therefore, it is unlikely that…”
Elias Terrazas v. Alfonso Menchaca (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “After the judgment was a affirmed on appeal, Menchaca moved to attach the funds pursuant to Ind. Code Ann. § 34-25-2-1 (West, Westlaw current with all legislation of the Second Regular Session of the 118th General Assembly (2014) with effective dates through May 1, 2014) to…”
— Ind. Code § 34-25-2-1(b)(1) — 1 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.