§ 34.061.Duty Toward Seized Personalty; Liability

The custody duty and the liability that backs it.

The officer shall keep securely all personal property on which he has levied and for which no delivery bond is given.

The delivery bond exception explains the shape of the duty. Where a bond is given, the property can stay with whoever holds it and the bond answers for producing it; without one, the officer holds it and must keep it safe.

If an injury or loss to an interested party results from the negligence of the officer, the officer and his sureties are liable for the value of the property lost or damaged.

The standard is negligence, not strict liability. Property destroyed by fire or stolen despite reasonable care does not produce liability.

"An interested party" is broader than the debtor. A lienholder, a co-owner, or someone whose property was seized by mistake can be injured by the loss, and each is within the section.

Naming the sureties is what gives the duty force. An officer’s personal means may not cover the value of seized property; the bond is what the injured party recovers against.

This is also the section the general officer-immunity provision carves out. That provision protects an officer executing a writ in good faith except as provided by Section 34.061 — so good faith is no answer to negligent loss of property in custody.

The injured party bears the burden on two points: that the officer took actual possession of the property, and the actual value of any property lost or damaged.

The possession requirement matters. An officer who levied constructively, or who never took the goods, is outside the section.