§ 62.063.Indemnification of Officer for Money Spent

A lien in all but name, and it is the officer’s protection for money already out of pocket.

If an officer is required to expend money in the security, management, or care of sequestered property, he may retain possession of the property until the money is repaid by the party seeking to replevy the property or by that party’s agent or attorney.

The officer’s exposure is real. Feeding livestock, insuring equipment, paying for storage or securing premises are costs the officer incurs personally to satisfy the duty of prudent management.

Waiting for a costs order at the end of the case would be a long wait, and the preceding section’s taxing of charges as costs of suit does not help until judgment.

So this provides immediate recovery at the moment the property is being handed back.

The retention right operates only against a party seeking to replevy, which is the moment the officer’s leverage is greatest and the transaction most convenient — the party wants the property and the officer wants reimbursement.

Payment may come from the party or from their agent or attorney, which allows counsel to settle the officer’s charges without the client attending.

The right is confined to money "required to be expended". An officer who chose to incur an expense that prudent management did not require has no retention right for it.

The section does not cover the officer’s compensation — only money spent. Compensation is dealt with by the preceding section and is taxed as a cost of suit.

Read with the other two custody provisions, the chapter’s treatment of the officer is balanced. A high duty of care, a right to be paid for meeting it, and a means of recovering what was spent.