§ 8.01-548.Who may levy attachment and on what.
Chapter 20. Attachments and Bail in Civil Cases · Article 2. Summons; Levy; Lien; Bonds, Etc · Last amended 1977 · Last verified July 16, 2026
Full Text of § 8.01-548
Plain-English Summary
Debtors do not always keep their property in the same county where a lawsuit is filed, and this section keeps that fact from becoming a loophole. It allows an attachment to reach any of the defendant’s property no matter where in Virginia it sits — the writ is not confined to the jurisdiction that issued it.
To make that reach practical, the section gives creditors a choice of who executes the levy: the officer of the county or city where the attachment was issued, or the officer of the county or city where the property happens to be. That flexibility avoids the delay and expense of sending an officer across the state to seize property that a local officer could just as easily reach.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is an attachment limited to property located in the county where it was issued?
No. An attachment may be levied on any estate of the defendant regardless of whether it is located in the issuing county or city or in another one.
Who can carry out the levy if the property is in a different county from where the attachment issued?
Either the officer of the county or city where the attachment issued, or the officer of the county or city where the property is located, may levy it.
Does the creditor have to choose one officer over the other?
The section gives both options without requiring one over the other, letting the levy be carried out by whichever officer is positioned to reach the property.
What kind of property does this section cover?
It covers any estate of the defendant, without limiting the type of property that may be levied on.
Why does Virginia allow levy by an officer outside the issuing jurisdiction?
Because debtors’ property is often located in a different county or city than where the lawsuit was filed, allowing the local officer to act makes the levy practical instead of requiring the issuing county’s officer to travel.
Amendment History
Code 1950, § 8-535; 1977, c. 617.