Definition
Sequestration is the compulsory separation or seizure of property, funds, or persons from the ordinary control of their owner or custodian, typically by order of a court, pending the resolution of a legal dispute or the satisfaction of a legal obligation. The term carries distinct meanings across civil, equity, and procedural contexts.
1. Equity practice (writ of sequestration). A writ directing the seizure of a defendant's real and personal estate — including rents, issues, and profits — when the defendant is in contempt of court. The property is held in the custody of commissioners (traditionally four, nominated by the complainant) or a sheriff until the defendant complies with the court's order. The writ is coercive, not punitive: the sequestered property is not forfeited but held as leverage.
2. Civil law and Louisiana practice. The deposit of property in dispute by the contending parties themselves into the hands of a neutral third party (the sequester), to be held and ultimately delivered to whichever party is adjudged entitled to it. This is closer to an agreed escrow arrangement than a coercive remedy.
3. Jury sequestration. The physical isolation of a jury during trial or deliberations to prevent exposure to outside information, media coverage, or improper contact. The court orders jurors to remain under supervision, often housed together, until a verdict is reached.
4. Legislative / fiscal sequestration. An automatic, across-the-board reduction of government spending triggered by statutory mechanism when budgetary targets are not met. This usage is distinctly modern and almost exclusively American federal in origin.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): The process or act of sequestering; a putting aside or separating.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): The state of being separated or set aside; separation; retirement; seclusion from society. ("This loathsome sequestration have I had.")
The common meaning captures the general sense of separation or isolation well enough that a layperson encountering the word in a legal text may think they understand it. They often do not. In equity practice, sequestration is not mere separation — it is a specific coercive mechanism tied to contempt and the custody of property under court authority. The fiscal and jury senses are recognizable from news coverage but carry their own technical requirements that the plain meaning entirely omits.
---
Common Confusion
Sequestration is sometimes confused with attachment, garnishment, and receivership because all involve the court's reach into a party's property. The distinctions matter. Attachment typically secures property at the outset of litigation before judgment. Garnishment is a post-judgment remedy directed at a third party holding the debtor's assets. Receivership places property under the management of a court-appointed receiver with broader administrative duties. Sequestration in equity is specifically linked to contempt: it is the court's response to a party's refusal to obey, not merely a creditor's collection tool or a pre-judgment security device.
The civil law form (deposit by the parties) can be confused with conventional escrow or interpleader. The difference is that sequestration in the civil law sense is specifically tied to disputed ownership, while escrow and interpleader have their own procedural frameworks.
---
Recognized Forms
/ SUBTYPES
Conventional sequestration: The civil law variant in which the parties themselves agree to deposit disputed property with a sequester pending resolution.
Necessary sequestration: Court-ordered sequestration imposed without the consent of the parties, typically where the property's safety or preservation requires immediate action.
Writ of sequestration (equity): The coercive contempt remedy described above, directed to commissioners or the sheriff.
Jury sequestration: Isolation of jurors during trial or deliberations.
Fiscal sequestration: Automatic statutory spending cuts triggered by failure to meet budget targets.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The multi-meaning problem is the central research trap. A historical source discussing sequestration in a chancery context is describing a contempt remedy. The same word in a Louisiana treatise may describe a consensual deposit arrangement. A modern news article invoking sequestration is almost certainly discussing federal budget mechanics. These meanings do not overlap in any legally meaningful way, and conflating them will produce incorrect analysis.
In equity practice sources, pay close attention to whether the writ issues against a party in contempt or against a party whose property is simply in dispute. The contempt link is definitional in the equity writ sense, and sources that blur this distinction are either sloppy or using the term in a different tradition.
Historical sources — particularly Blackstone and Bouvier — focus almost entirely on the equity practice meaning and the civil law deposit meaning. They have nothing to say about jury sequestration as a formal doctrine or fiscal sequestration, both of which are modern developments. Researchers tracing jury isolation practices will find little under this heading in pre-20th century sources and should instead search under jury management, jury conduct, and related procedural headings.
In Louisiana research, the civil law tradition of sequestration remains operative and has its own statutory framework. Louisiana's code-based system distinguishes types of sequestration with more precision than common law equity sources, and common law dictionary definitions will be incomplete guides to Louisiana practice.
The fiscal sequestration sense emerged from the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget Act framework of the 1980s and became widely known following the Budget Control Act of 2011. It does not appear in any of the historical legal dictionaries and represents a genuine modern addition to the term's legal meaning, not merely a popular usage.
Corpus connections: sequestration interacts with contempt, receivership, interpleader, attachment, and jury management entries. In civil law jurisdictions, it connects directly to the sequester as a named legal role.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical sources agree on the core equity writ definition: Blackstone (cited in both editions of Black's), Bouvier, and both editions of Black's describe the writ as a contempt remedy authorizing commissioners to seize rents, issues, and profits of a noncompliant defendant. Black's (both editions) and Bouvier are essentially parallel on this point, reflecting a stable chancery practice.
Burrill adds the most useful historical texture by foregrounding the civil law tradition — the consensual deposit by contending parties with a neutral sequester — and tracing its relationship to the equity writ. Burrill is the strongest historical source for understanding the conceptual origins of the term and distinguishing the civil law and common law equity forms.
Rapalje & Lawrence gives only a fragmentary cross-reference, confirming that the equity writ was the dominant meaning in professional practice usage.
Anderson's entry, as reproduced in the source material, is unhelpfully out of sequence (the excerpt concerns married women's separate estates), suggesting an indexing artifact. Researchers should not rely on that excerpt for substantive guidance on sequestration.
What the historical sources collectively miss: jury sequestration as a doctrine, and fiscal sequestration entirely. These are not gaps to be explained away — they are genuine limitations of the historical shelf for modern research purposes.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Louisiana retains a distinct civil law sequestration framework with statutory authorization for both conventional and necessary sequestration, reflecting its civilian tradition rather than common law equity practice. In federal courts and most common law states, the equity writ form has been largely absorbed into or replaced by modern contempt enforcement mechanisms and receivership, making the classical writ less commonly encountered but still doctrinally relevant. Fiscal sequestration is a creature of federal statutory law with no direct state law equivalent.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: Contempt of Court; Receivership; Jury Management and Deliberations; Civil Law Property and Obligations.
---