One of the earliest acts of royal courts, Replevin had its roots in customary court law, and its formal origins can be traced back to Glanvil, Chief Justiciar of England during the reign of Henry II (1154-1189). [15] Strictly speaking, Replevin in its original form was an interim remedy. [16] Its purpose was to obtain from the applicant the restitution of personal property deprived of his possession until the right of possession could be determined by a court. Undoubtedly, he should avoid disputes that could cause a breach of the peace until the dispute over the property is resolved. In other words, the rule of law has begun to replace local armed violence and personal conflict as a solution to disputes over movable property. The action was a direct consequence of efforts to regulate self-handling, which was at the origin of tort law. The form of legal redress took place in cases of urgency (distractio). It was the practice of taking away certain property from the peasant or subordinate until an action was taken. In the Middle Ages, the services that could be needed were numerous, because the incidents of tenure at that time were very numerous. Distress was also possible as damage. If the animals went astray and caused harm to a neighbor, they could be restrained until the damage was repaired. Whether or not the emergency was raised over rent or damage to livestock, the owner of the animals could obtain their release by „gauge and pledge“ – a form of assurance that the damage would be repaired. A peculiarity of the seizure was that the pledge did not receive any legal possession.
Personal property was considered to be in the custody of the Act. Therefore, there was no unlawful seizure by the alleged creditor, since, technically, no possession was derived. [17] [18] In the case of our entrepreneur, the Replvin campaign was a complete success. After an evidentiary hearing, the judge issued an order granting our urgent request for notice of seizure and ordering the prothonotary (name of the clerk of the court in Pennsylvania) to issue a seizure order to the sheriff`s office ordering him to take possession of the project documents after posting a bond. After completing the necessary procedural requirements, we were accompanied by several uniformed police officers to retrieve the wrongly removed project materials from the subcontractor`s warehouse. The materials were then transported to the project and immediately put into operation. The entire process took weeks, rather than the months (or more) that the customer might have needed to obtain suitable replacement materials. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the action of the Trover also emerged, which largely replaced that of intrusion in relation to illegal distress. Replevin and Trover never completely matched because there was a limitation for Replevin. [24] REPLEVIN, appeal. Title of an action for recovery of movable property and property. 2.
It is necessary to examine: 1. For which property will this action be situated. 2. What interest must the applicant have? 3. For what violation. 4. Procedural documents. 5. Judgment. 3.-1. In order to support Replevin, the property in question must be personal personal property and not a violation of the property or any related matter; 4 T.R. 504; nor for anything which has been converted into movable property by being separated from him by the defendant and at the same time taken away; 2 watts, R.
126; 3 pp. & R. 509 6 pp. & R. 4761; 10 p. and R. 114; 6 Green. No. 427; nor for writings concerning reality.
1 brownl. 168. 4. Movable property must also bear indications or ear tags distinguishing it from all other property of the same description; Otherwise, the applicant would require from the law what he cannot grant; Replevin for bulk money cannot therefore be maintained; However, it can be supported for money tied up in a pocket and taken by the applicant in that state. 2 Amen. No. 61. See 1 Dall. 157; 6 binn.
2; 3 Serg. and Rawle, 562; 2 P. A. Browne`s R. 160; Addis. R. 134; 10 Serg. and Rawle, 114; 4 Dall. Appx. I.; 2 watts R. 126; 2 Rawles R.
423. 5.-2. The plaintiff must have been possessed at the time of the legend or, which amounts to the same thing, have absolute ownership of the movable property and be entitled to possession of the movable property, otherwise it could not have been taken away from him. In other words, he must have had a general or special good as guarantor of the goods. His right of possession must also be maintained until the judgment is pronounced, failing which he is not entitled to restitution of his property. Co. Litt. 145, b. However, it has been questioned that the Bailee can keep Replevin on a more naked Taime for safe storage.