G.L. c. 247, §§ 7, 8, 10, 17, 18; G.L. c. 260, § 2A
Replevin in Massachusetts — getting the thing itself back
A claim in Massachusetts trial courts · Last verified August 26, 2026
Massachusetts gives an owner of personal property two ways to respond to someone who is wrongfully keeping it, and they produce different things.
Conversion pays you the value. In effect the defendant is made to buy the item, and title passes with the judgment.
Replevin returns the item. It is the right claim when the property is unique, irreplaceable, or worth more to you than the market says — business records, tools of a trade, a family heirloom, a specific vehicle, a pet.
The price of that is a bond, posted before the property is taken.
What the claim is
Someone has your personal property and will not give it back, and you want the property rather than its value.
Where the right comes from
What a plaintiff has to prove
- A right to immediate possession of the property — ownership, or a possessory interest good against the defendant;
- The property is identifiable and in the defendant's possession or control; and
- It is being unlawfully taken, detained or attached, in the language of § 7.
Immediate possession is the element. A person who owns an item but has leased it out, pledged it, or left it under a lien has no present right to it, and cannot replevy.
The bond
Replevin is unusual among civil actions in requiring the plaintiff to post security before the remedy operates, and the reason is obvious: the writ takes property out of the defendant's hands before anyone has decided who is entitled to it.
The bond is required by §§ 2 and 8, with the amount set by reference to an appraisal of the goods. It is conditioned on the plaintiff prosecuting the action and returning the goods with damages and costs if the plaintiff loses.
A defective bond is a real problem. Section 17 provides for dismissal where the bond does not comply, and the failure is not a technicality the court overlooks.
Actions against the sureties must be brought within one year after final judgment, under § 18 — a short and easily missed deadline for a defendant who won and now wants to collect on the bond.
What happens to the property
The writ directs a sheriff or constable to take the property and deliver it to the plaintiff, who holds it while the case runs.
If the plaintiff wins, they keep it, and may recover damages for the detention under §§ 10 and 19 — the value of the use lost during the period the defendant held it.
If the plaintiff loses, the court orders a writ of return under §§ 20 and 21, and the defendant recovers the property along with damages for its detention. The bond is what makes that order collectible.
How long you have to file
Three years under G.L. c. 260, § 2A, which by its terms covers actions "for taking, detaining or injuring goods or chattels."
Accrual is the wrongful taking, or the refusal after demand where the defendant's possession began lawfully. As with conversion, a demand is what converts lawful possession into unlawful detention — so where a repair shop, a warehouse or a former employee holds the item with your original permission, the demand comes first.
What has to happen before you file
A demand for return, where possession began lawfully.
The bond, which is prepared with the complaint rather than after it.
What the claim pays
The property itself.
Damages for the detention — the value of the use during the wrongful holding, under §§ 10 and 19.
Costs.
No multiplier and no attorney's fees, absent a contract or another statute. Where the retention was unfair or deceptive in a business setting, chapter 93A is the route to fees, and where the item was sold to you by deceit, G.L. c. 231 § 85J trebles damages for a purchaser.
Which court
District Court or Superior Court, following the value of the goods and the $50,000 procedural threshold.
Choosing between replevin and conversion
Replevin, when:
- the item is unique or irreplaceable;
- the item is worth more to you than its market value;
- you need it back to operate — records, equipment, a vehicle used for work;
- the defendant is judgment-proof, so a money judgment would be worthless; or
- the item is appreciating.
Conversion, when:
- the item is gone, destroyed, or has been sold to a good-faith purchaser;
- money will do;
- you cannot post the bond; or
- you cannot identify the specific item, which replevin requires.
Both, in the alternative, where the property's whereabouts are unclear — which is common, and means the case does not fail if the item turns out to have been disposed of.
Common defenses
- The plaintiff has no right to immediate possession — a lease, a pledge, a security interest.
- A lawful right to retain — an artisan's or garagekeeper's lien, a warehouse lien, a landlord's statutory rights.
- A defective bond, under § 17.
- The goods are not identifiable, or are not in the defendant's possession.
- No demand, where possession began lawfully.
- Limitations — three years.
What people get wrong
Replevin returns the item; conversion pays for it. Choosing the wrong one wastes the case.
The bond comes first. A plaintiff who cannot post security cannot have the writ, whatever the merits.
It is useless if the item is gone. Replevin operates on specific, identifiable property. If it was destroyed or sold on, conversion is the claim.
Losing has a price. The writ of return plus damages for detention, secured by the bond you posted.
Sureties have a one-year clock. A defendant who won and wants to reach the bond must sue the sureties within a year of final judgment.
Where it came from
Replevin is one of the oldest actions in the common law, and it began in a specific dispute: the distress. A lord who seized a tenant's cattle for unpaid rent left the tenant with no remedy at law except to sue for damages, by which time the animals were gone. Replevin let the tenant get them back first and argue about the rent afterwards — which is why the bond was there from the beginning, since the property changes hands before anyone has proved anything.
That structure survived every change in what people own. The action is still about specific, identifiable chattels; it still moves the property before judgment; and it still requires the plaintiff to guarantee the return.
Its modern importance comes from the same insight that produced it. Money damages assume things are fungible, and much personal property is not. A conversion judgment for the value of a small business's records, its customer list or its only delivery van compensates for something the business needed rather than something it wanted to sell. Replevin is how the law says: give it back.
Common questions
How do I get my property back rather than money?
By bringing a replevin action under G.L. c. 247 and posting the required bond.
What is the bond for?
It guarantees that you will prosecute the action and return the goods with damages and costs if you lose. The amount is set by reference to an appraisal.
Is replevin better than suing for the value?
It is better when the item is unique, irreplaceable, needed for your work, or when the defendant could not pay a money judgment. It is useless if the item no longer exists.
What if the property has been sold or destroyed?
Then replevin will not work and conversion is the claim.
Do I have to ask for it back first?
Yes, where the defendant's possession began lawfully. The demand and refusal is what makes the detention wrongful.
How long do I have?
Three years from the wrongful taking or from the refusal after your demand.