Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 14, § 4454 (2026)

Recording necessary to validity; claim specified in writ; seizure on execution; lien

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No attachment of real estate on mesne process creates any lien thereon, unless the nature and amount of plaintiff's demand is set forth in the complaint or specifications therein or account annexed thereto, nor unless the officer making it within 5 days thereafter files in the office of the register of deeds in the county or district in which some part of said estate is situated an attested copy of so much of his return on the writ of attachment as relates to the attachment, with the value of the defendant's property which he is thereby commanded to attach, the names of the parties, the date of the writ of attachment and the court to which it is returnable. If the copy is not so filed within 5 days, the attachment takes effect from the time it is filed, although it is after service on the defendant, if before the time he is required to serve his answer. No seizure of real estate on execution, where there is no subsisting attachment thereof made in the action in which such execution issues, creates any lien thereon, unless the officer making it within 5 days thereafter files in the office of the register of deeds in the county or district in which some part of said estate is situated an attested copy of so much of his return on said execution as relates to the seizure, with the names of the parties, the date of the execution, the amount of the debt and costs named therein and the court by which it was issued. If the copy is not so filed, the seizure takes effect from the time it is filed. Such proceedings shall be had in such office by the register of deeds, as are prescribed in Title 33, chapter 11. All recorded deeds take precedence over unrecorded attachments.  
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1983–1991 · leading case: Farmers & Mechanics Sav. Bank v. Garofalo, 595 A.2d 341 (Conn. 1991).
Farmers & Mechanics Sav. Bank v. Garofalo, 595 A.2d 341 (Conn. 1991). “We therefore conclude that, under § 52-285, an attachment that is subsequently transformed into a judicial lien following a judgment on the underlying cause of action relates back, for purposes of determining priority, only to the moment, when the certificate of attachment is…”
United States v. Belanger, 598 F. Supp. 598 (D. Me. 1984). “14 M.R.S.A. § 4454; First Auburn Trust Co.”
Putterbaugh v. Int'l Harvester Credit Corp. (In Re Mills), 32 B.R. 507 (Bankr. D. Me. 1983). “699, 702 (1928); Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 14, § 4454 (1964). A recorded attachment, while it does not destroy the debtors’ title or right to sell, is effective against subsequent purchasers.”
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.