Definition
Latin: "By the mind and by the body." A phrase used in property law, particularly in the context of possession, to describe the two elements that together constitute complete legal possession of a thing. Possession *animo et corpore* is possession both intended (the mental element) and physically exercised (the physical element). The phrase captures the classical Roman law doctrine that true possession requires the concurrence of both will and physical control — neither alone is sufficient for full legal possession.
---
Common Language
This is pure legal Latin with no common English counterpart. The COMMON LANGUAGE section does not apply.
---
Core Elements
The phrase encapsulates a two-part test for legal possession:
ANIMUS (Mind / Intention): The possessor must hold the thing with the intent to possess it as their own, or at minimum with the intent to exercise control over it. This is the subjective, mental component. A person who holds an object accidentally or without awareness does not satisfy this element.
CORPUS (Body / Physical Control): The possessor must have actual physical control or physical dominion over the thing. This is the objective, external component — the visible, demonstrable act of holding or controlling.
Both elements must be present simultaneously for possession to be recognized as complete in the classical sense. The absence of either reduces the legal character of the relationship: corpus without animus may be mere detention; animus without corpus does not constitute possession at all.
---
Recognized Forms
/ SUBTYPES
The phrase connects to a broader family of possession-related Latin terms in the common law corpus:
- ANIMO SOLO: Possession maintained by intention alone, after physical control has been relinquished — a recognized exception for constructive possession in certain circumstances.
- CORPORE ET ANIMO: A variant formulation expressing the same concept with reversed word order; functionally synonymous.
- ANIMUS POSSIDENDI: The intent to possess, standing alone as a term of art.
- ANIMUS REVERTENDI: A related but distinct concept (intent to return), appearing in property and animal law.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encounter *animo et corpore* primarily in historical and common law materials dealing with the theory of possession — a foundational concept in property law, adverse possession, bailment, and the law of finders. The phrase signals that the source is engaging with classical possession doctrine rather than modern statutory definitions, which frequently collapse or restate these elements in plain English without the Latin.
**Trap in historical sources:** The spelling variant in Black's 2nd Ed. — rendered in some printings as *animo et ocorpore* — appears to be a typographical artifact. Researchers should treat *animo et corpore* and *animo et ocorpore* as the same phrase. Searching historical indexes under the misspelled form may return no results; always search both variants.
**Jurisdictional layering:** Because this phrase derives from Roman law transmitted through civilian and common law channels, its precise weight varies. In civil law jurisdictions (Louisiana, Quebec, Scotland), the animus/corpus framework retains formal doctrinal significance. In most common law jurisdictions, courts absorbed the concepts without consistently using the Latin, so the phrase tends to appear in treatise literature and scholarly commentary more than in reported opinions.
**Connection to adverse possession research:** Any corpus-level research into adverse possession doctrine — particularly the "actual possession" and "hostile" elements — benefits from understanding the animus/corpus framework, as historical courts and treatise writers often reasoned from it explicitly.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) provides the core entry, defining the phrase as "by the mind and by the body; by the intention and by the body" — making explicit that the phrase decomposes possession into its mental and physical constituents. The entry is brief, functioning as a pointer to the underlying doctrine rather than a full exposition of it.
Historical dictionaries generally do not elaborate further on this phrase as a standalone entry, treating it instead as a component of the broader treatment of *possessio* and *animus possidendi*. Researchers seeking doctrinal depth should look to the treatise tradition — Savigny's work on possession and its transmission through Pollock and Wright's *Possession in the Common Law* (1888) are the canonical sources for the animus/corpus framework in English legal literature. Black's 2nd Ed. captures the phrase accurately but provides no analytical development.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The animus/corpus framework is most formally operative in civil law jurisdictions, where it retains explicit doctrinal significance in possession and property codes. Common law jurisdictions absorbed the substance of the framework but typically express it in translated or paraphrased terms. Researchers working in Louisiana or in comparative property law materials will find the Latin phrase used more precisely and more frequently than in other American jurisdictions.
---