§ 2701.When court may order disposition of property
Article 27. Disposition of Property in Litigation · Last amended 1964 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceCPLR 2701 lets a court order property that is the subject of a lawsuit paid into court or delivered to a person it names, with security it requires, when a party holds it as trustee, when special circumstances justify withholding it, or when ownership depends on the case's outcome.
Full Text of CPLR 2701
Text size
The court, upon motion or on its own initiative, with such notice as it deems proper, may order personal property capable of delivery which is the subject of the action, paid into court, or delivered to such person as it may direct, with such security as the court shall direct, and subject to its further direction if:
1. a party has such property in his possession, custody or control as trustee for another party or where it belongs or is due to another party; or 2. a party has such property in his possession, custody or control and it belongs or is due to another party, where special circumstances make it desirable that payment or delivery to such other party should be withheld; or 3. the ownership of such property will depend on the outcome of a pending action and no party is willing to accept possession or custody of it during the pendency of the action.
Plain-English Summary
Some lawsuits turn on who gets to keep a piece of property while the case is still being fought over. CPLR 2701 gives the court a tool for those situations: on motion, or on its own initiative, with whatever notice it thinks appropriate, it can order personal property capable of delivery — the subject of the action — paid into court or handed to someone the court names, with security as the court directs and subject to its further direction.
That power kicks in under three circumstances. First, when a party already holds the property as a trustee for someone else, or the property belongs or is due to another party outright — the classic stakeholder situation. Second, when a party holds property that belongs or is due to another, but special circumstances make it better for the court to hold off on letting that delivery happen right away. Third, when ownership of the property will turn on how the pending action is decided, and no one involved wants to take custody of it while that question is still open.
In each version, the aim is the same: keep the property safe and neutral until the case answers the question that determines who owns it, instead of leaving it in the hands of whichever party happens to have possession when the lawsuit starts.
Frequently Asked Questions
When can a New York court order property held for safekeeping during a lawsuit?
When a party holds the property as trustee for another, when a party holds property due to another but special circumstances justify withholding delivery, or when ownership depends on the outcome of the pending action and no party wants custody.
Does the court need a motion before ordering disposition of disputed property under CPLR 2701?
No. The court can act on motion or on its own initiative, with such notice as it considers proper.
What if no party wants to hold disputed property while a case is pending?
That is one of the three situations CPLR 2701 addresses directly — when ownership depends on the case's outcome and no party is willing to take custody, the court can order the property paid into court or delivered to someone it names.
Can a court require security before letting someone hold litigation property?
Yes. CPLR 2701 lets the court order the property delivered with such security as the court directs, and the arrangement remains subject to the court's further direction.
What kind of property does CPLR 2701 cover?
It covers personal property capable of delivery that is itself the subject of the action, not real property or property that is merely incidental to the dispute.
Advisory Committee Notes
This section is derived from CPA §§ 978 and 979-a. The first sentence of CPA § 978 is incorporated in paragraph 1, with some change in substance. The sale provisions have been combined in CPLR § 2702.
The first sentence of former § 978 provided that property described in paragraph 1 of this section should be paid into court or to the party to whom it belonged or was due. The former requirement of an admission by pleading or on examination has been omitted. There seems to be no reason to limit the means by which the court may become aware of such a situation. See, e.g., CPLR § 3123; CPA § 322. This section allows the court to have the property paid into court, or to any person the court directs. This not only covers the former provision, but takes into account the possibility that the property will be of a nature which requires storage under the provisions of CPLR § 2602. This section also allows the court to appoint a trustee for such property rather than have it stored during the pendency of the action.
Part of the second sentence of CPA § 978 has been eliminated since it added nothing to the first sentence. If a party has property in his possession or custody and it belongs or is due to another party, it is subject to delivery into court under Paragraph 1, whether or not special circumstances exist.
Although former § 978 did not directly give the court power to order the sale of property which fell within the ambit of that section, it did provide that such property might be ordered paid into court. Since CPLR § 2601(d) gives the court power to direct transfer or investment of money or securities paid into court “as it deems proper,” and CPLR § 2602 gives the court power to make any disposition of other property paid into court as “it deems proper,” property paid into court pursuant to former § 978, could thereupon be sold. The court apparently had this power under former provisions. See CPA §§ 134-a, 136; notes to CPLR §§ 2601(d) and 2602.
The last sentence of former § 978 has been omitted since CPLR § 2607 provides that no property paid into court shall be paid out except by order of the court.
CPA § 979-a has been incorporated in Paragraph 2 of this section and, by reference, in CPLR § 2702. The words “neither party” have been changed to “no party” to account for actions in which there are more than two parties. The requirement in former § 979-a that an application for an order to sell must have been made by a party has been omitted in view of the fact that the introductory clause of this section permits the court to make an order on motion or on its own initiative. There is no apparent reason why the court should await a motion by a party to dispose of the property when no party is willing to accept the custody of such property. Although former § 979-a provided for the sale of property in dispute, this section taken with CPLR § 2702 gives the court broader discretion. The court may order such property paid into, sold, or delivered to a trustee. In view of this broad discretion, the last sentence of former § 979-a, which provided for disposition of proceeds, has been omitted as unnecessary. See CPLR §§ 2601 and 2602 and notes thereto. In cases where, under former § 979-a, the court could only order the property sold, it may, under this section, also order it delivered to a person or paid into court.
The words “with or without security” in CPA § 978 have been replaced by “with such security as the court shall direct.” Since there is no limitation on the nature of responsibility of persons to whom the court may direct delivery of the property, some security should be required in such cases. (Cf. CPLR § 6403, requiring security from a temporary receiver.).
Amendment History
Add, L 1962, ch 308, § 1; amd, L 1962, ch 318, § 12; L 1964, ch 422, § 1, eff Sept 1, 1964.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:court order disposition of property NY lawsuitproperty paid into court during litigationdisputed property custody pending trialstakeholder property lawsuit New Yorktrustee property court order pending case