Judiciary committee concurs with House Bill 21 to clarify service, execution of writs of possession

April 17 — The Tenant Judiciary committee voted to report favorably and concur with House Bill 21 (H 21), which addresses who may serve and execute writs of possession in ejectment proceedings, after members discussed a statutory ambiguity about deputy sheriffs.

Eric, legislative counsel, told the committee that H 21 “had to do with the subject of service of a particular kind of court process.” He described the underlying proceeding as an ejectment action brought by a property owner who claims another person is unlawfully occupying the owner’s land, and said the writ of possession directs the sheriff to return possession to the lawful owner.

The committee’s discussion centered on a discrepancy in existing law. Eric explained that, generally, sheriffs and deputy sheriffs have statewide authority to serve court process, but the statute that specifically addresses writs of possession appears to limit service to the sheriff of the county where the property is located. He told the committee the bill would permit any sheriff to serve a writ of possession statewide, aligning the writ provision with the general rule for other court process.

Committee members raised whether deputy sheriffs are included and whether the authority extended to execution of the writ after service. Eric said that, following conversations with Sheriff Anderson, the sheriff’s office had interpreted the statute to permit deputies to serve writs as well. Eric reported that the sheriff’s office and its attorney were “comfortable” with reading the statute to cover both service and execution, though he and members described the statutory language as ambiguous.

Committee debate did not produce an amendment to the bill. A member asked whether the bill covered execution (the physical removal or turnover after a writ is issued), and the committee was told the office that enforces writs reads the law to allow deputies to execute writs in addition to serving them.

After discussion, the chair called for a vote to report H 21 favorably and concur with the House bill. The committee recorded unanimous support: Senator Norris — yes; Senator Behovsky — yes; Senator Bruce — yes; Senator Meadows — yes; Senator Sheen — yes. The committee voted to report the bill favorably; no amendments were recorded during the committee action.

The committee’s record indicates the statutory ambiguity about deputy sheriffs and execution was the primary substantive concern discussed; committee members concluded the sheriff’s office interpretation was sufficient for the committee to vote to advance the bill.