Rule 85.08.Claimant to Furnish Bond--Exception--Conditions of Bond.

Attachment lets a claimant reach a defendant’s property before any judgment has been entered, which creates real risk for the owner if the attachment turns out to be unjustified. Rule 85.08 offsets that risk by requiring the claimant to post security before a writ can issue. The bond must be approved by the court, executed by the claimant as principal with one or more sufficient sureties, and set in an amount the court chooses, up to double the amount claimed.

The bond’s conditions do the real work. The claimant promises to prosecute the underlying claims without delay and with effect, to refund to the owner any sums adjudged refundable or found to have been received by the claimant and not justly due, and to pay damages and costs suffered by the property owner, by any garnishee or interpleader drawn into the case, or by any officer acting under the writ. In short, the bond stands behind everyone the attachment might harm if it proves improper — the owner, third parties pulled into the proceeding, and the sheriff or other officer who executed it.

The rule carves out one narrow exception: when the State or a county is itself the claimant acting in its own behalf, no bond is required. That exception recognizes that a governmental claimant is not the type of judgment-proof or hard-to-collect-from party the bond requirement is designed to guard against.

Because the bond is central to whether a writ can even issue, Rule 85.04 makes issuance conditional on compliance with this rule, and Rule 85.11 gives the court authority to order a new bond if the one filed proves inadequate. Rule 85.24 lets an injured party sue on the bond directly if its conditions are breached.