Skip to main content
· 10/26/1971

Fuentes v. Shevin

Citations

  • 404 U.S. 908
  • 92 S. Ct. 234

About this case

Fuentes v. Shevin

Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States wherein petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the Uniform Commercial Code provisions of two states, Florida and Pennsylvania , which allowed for the summary seizure of a person's goods or chattels under a writ of replevin . The statutes were challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment . The Court held that the statutes acted as deprivations of plaintiff's property without due process .

The Court noted that seizure without notice and the opportunity for a hearing is acceptable only under limited circumstances:

  1. The seizure is necessary for an important public or government interest,
  2. There is a need for prompt action, and
  3. The seizure is initiated by an agent of the government.

These exceptions would apply (for example) when property is tainted food , misbranded drugs or unpaid taxes needed to fund a war.

See also

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fuentes_v._Shevin&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: See also")

External links

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fuentes_v._Shevin&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: External links")

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fuentes_v._Shevin&oldid=1351327461 "

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that losing party could not obtain stay of execution without posting supersedeas bond when prevailing party appealed judgment seeking increase in amount of damages

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.