University of Baltimore Law Review


The author analyzes the basis of recent decisions which have held state procedures for prejudgment attachment and replevin unconstitutional. He considers the effect of these decisions, which establish a new balance in the rights of debtors and creditors, on Maryland provisional creditors' remedies. His conclusion is that, although the Maryland procedure for attachments on original process will probably survive attack, the procedures for replevin and distress will not.

Included in

Law Commons