Definition
A Latin phrase from old English practice meaning "without the consideration of the court" or "without judgment." The term describes a procedural condition in which a matter proceeded or a determination was reached without the court having formally deliberated upon and rendered a considered judgment. It signals the absence of judicial consideration in the proper sense — that is, the court's substantive weighing and pronouncing of a decision.
Why It Matters in Research
This phrase is a relic of medieval English common law procedure and will appear almost exclusively in pre-modern sources — case reports, writs, and procedural treatises from the era when Latin dominated formal legal writing. Researchers encountering it in historical texts should treat it as a marker of procedural irregularity: the phrase was used to describe situations where something occurred in the record that lacked the formal sanction of a court's considered determination.
Because the phrase belongs to a vocabulary that became obsolete well before legal Latin was formally abolished in English courts (1730s), it is unlikely to appear in post-medieval primary sources except as a historical quotation or scholarly reference. Researchers working in early Year Books, plea rolls, or medieval procedural treatises are most likely to encounter it. It does not translate into a recognizable modern doctrine by the same name, though the underlying concept — the requirement that judicial action be grounded in genuine judicial consideration — persists in modern due process and judgment-validity doctrine.
The sole substantive source supporting this entry is Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.), which cites Fleta, lib. 2, c. 47, § 13. Fleta is a late-thirteenth-century English legal treatise (circa 1290), written anonymously and named after the Fleet Prison where it was reportedly composed. It is a significant source for understanding the procedural vocabulary of early English common law. Researchers wishing to verify or extend the meaning of this phrase should consult Fleta directly, bearing in mind that the treatise is a commentary on the practice of the royal courts under Edward I and draws heavily on Bracton.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) provides the only dictionary treatment of this phrase in the Law Mind corpus. The entry is brief: "In old practice. Without the consideration of the court; without judgment." The citation to Fleta, lib. 2, c. 47, § 13 is the single anchor for the term.
No other historical dictionary in the corpus — including Bouvier's Law Dictionary or Jacob's Law Dictionary — appears to carry this entry, which is consistent with the phrase's extreme antiquity and narrow procedural application. The absence from Bouvier is notable, since Bouvier typically preserved a broad range of Latin maxims and old-practice terms. This omission suggests the phrase had fallen entirely out of active legal use well before the nineteenth century and was retained in Black's primarily as a historical artifact.
Researchers should note that Black's 2nd Ed. was compiled by Henry Campbell Black and published in 1910. Its inclusion of phrases like this one reflects the edition's broader coverage of historical and Latin legal terminology — coverage that was progressively reduced in later editions of Black's. The phrase does not appear with significant elaboration even in Black's, and no case law treatment has been identified in standard research sources.
Jurisdictional Note
The phrase is rooted in medieval English common law and has no recognized counterpart in modern American, English, or Commonwealth legal usage. It carries no operative legal significance in any current jurisdiction.