Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-6-117 (2026)

Description of property

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A substantially accurate description of the property to be attached, and its approximate value, shall be set forth in the bill or affidavit praying for the writ of attachment, and if in the bill of complaint, same shall be verified by the oath of the complainant, complainant's agent or attorney.

(b) The issuing officer shall look to but not be bound by such recitations.

(c) Lacking such description and valuation, the bond shall be in a penalty double the amount claimed by the plaintiff or complainant.

Acts 1927, ch. 78, § 5; mod. Code 1932, §§ 9420, 9421; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 23-617.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2001–2002 · leading case: Durkan Patterned Carpet, Inc. v. Premier Hotel Dev. Grp. (In Re Premier Hotel Dev. Grp.), 270 B.R. 234 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Durkan Patterned Carpet, Inc. v. Premier Hotel Dev. Grp. (In Re Premier Hotel Dev. Grp.), 270 B.R. 234 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2001). · cites it 2× “” First Tennessee maintains that under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-6-117 (e), Durkan was required to post an attachment bond “double the amount of Durkan’s claim” which “would have been in a minimum amount of $127,511.”

CainRash Architectural Grp., Inc. v. Premier Hotel Dev. Grp. (In re Premier Hotel Dev. Grp.), 271 B.R. 813 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2002). · cites it 2× “First Tennessee also asserts as a basis for dismissal that CainRash failed to perfect its lien through issuance of a proper attachment because the attachment bond was not for an amount twice the amount owed to CainRash as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-6-117 (c). Because the…”

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.