Art. 3544.Plaintiff's Security
Book VII. Special Proceedings · Title I. Provisional Remedies · Chapter 1. Attachment and Sequestration · Amendment history unavailable · Last verified July 30, 2026
Full Text of Art. 3544
Plain-English Summary
Article 3544 sets the security a plaintiff has to post specifically for a writ of attachment, applying the general security concept from Article 3501 with a concrete figure. As a baseline, the security equals the amount of the plaintiff's demand, leaving out interest and costs, so the defendant has a bond roughly matching the exposure the attachment creates.
Nonresidence gets its own, lighter rule. When the sole ground for the writ is that the defendant is a nonresident, without any of the fraud, concealment, or flight grounds Article 3541 also lists, the security is capped at two hundred fifty dollars. That reduced figure reflects that a nonresidence-only attachment carries less of the wrongful-seizure risk associated with grounds involving alleged fraud or concealment.
The cap is not absolute. On a proper showing, the court can raise the security above two hundred fifty dollars, up to the full amount of the demand, if the circumstances call for more protection than the reduced figure provides.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much security does a plaintiff post to obtain a writ of attachment in Louisiana?
Ordinarily, the amount of the plaintiff's demand, not counting interest and costs. Article 3544 sets that as the default figure.
Is the security lower if the attachment is based only on nonresidence?
Yes. When nonresidence is the sole ground for the writ, Article 3544 caps the security at two hundred fifty dollars, unless the court increases it on a proper showing.
Can the court require more than two hundred fifty dollars in a nonresidence-only attachment?
Yes, up to the full amount of the demand, if the plaintiff makes a proper showing that a higher amount is warranted.
Why does nonresidence get a lower security requirement than the other attachment grounds?
Because a nonresidence-only attachment does not carry the same allegations of fraud, concealment, or intentional evasion that the other grounds in Article 3541 involve, so the risk the security is meant to cover is comparatively smaller.