A writ of ne exeat or a writ of capias ad respondendum shall not issue against a defendant whose property shall have been attached under a writ issued in the same action, except as provided in R. 4:60-4 (attachment and arrest).
Rule 4:51-5.Effect of prior writ of attachment
Current through June 18, 2026 · Last verified July 7, 2026
In one sentenceRule 4:51-5 bars a writ of ne exeat or capias ad respondendum against a defendant whose property is already under attachment in the same action, except as the attachment-and-arrest rule allows.
Full Text of Rule 4:51-5
Amendment History
New Jersey publishes each rule’s amendment record in a “History” note beneath the rule. It is reproduced verbatim below; the “R.R.” citations refer to the former Revised Rules numbering the current rules replaced.
Source-R.R. 4:66-7.
Plain-English Summary
A plaintiff does not get to pursue both remedies against the same defendant in the same action without limit. If the defendant's property has already been attached under a writ in that action, a writ of ne exeat or capias ad respondendum cannot also issue against that defendant, except where the attachment-and-arrest rule specifically permits it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a plaintiff seek a defendant's arrest after already attaching that defendant's property in the same case?
Only as the attachment-and-arrest rule allows; otherwise, a writ of ne exeat or capias ad respondendum cannot issue once the defendant's property has been attached in the same action.
Source & verification. The rule text and amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the
official New Jersey Rules of Court (N.J. Ct. R. 4:51-5). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of New Jersey (N.J. Const. art. VI, § 2, ¶ 3). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 7, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: attachment and arrest overlapprior writ of attachment