Definition
An ancient English writ available to the parson of a church whose predecessor had wrongfully alienated land or rents belonging to that church. The writ allowed the incumbent parson to recover church property that had been improperly conveyed away by a prior holder of the benefice. The name derives from the Latin *utrum* ("whether"), reflecting the form of the jury question put to the assize: whether the land in dispute was frankalmoin (free alms, held by the church) or lay fee (held by secular tenure). The proceeding was designed to resolve that threshold question of tenure before determining the proper forum — ecclesiastical or temporal — in which any further dispute should be heard.
The writ is obsolete. It has not been a functional remedy in English or American law for centuries.
---
Common Confusion
Assisa de Utrum is sometimes loosely grouped with other assize writs — particularly the grand assize and the petty assizes (novel disseisin, mort d'ancestor, darrein presentment) — as if it were simply another possessory remedy. It was not. Those writs addressed possession of land directly. Assisa de Utrum addressed a prior, jurisdictional question: the nature of the tenure by which land was held, not merely who held it. The confusion matters for research because sources that catalogue "the assizes" may list or omit this writ inconsistently, depending on whether the author treated it as a possessory action or a preliminary tenure-classification proceeding.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term surfaces almost exclusively in two contexts: medieval English legal history and the historical study of church-state jurisdictional boundaries. Researchers working in either area should be alert to several points.
First, the writ belongs to the era of the Norman and Angevin legal reforms, closely associated with the reign of Henry II and the broader systematization of the assize system. Any corpus work touching Bracton, Glanvill, or the Year Books of the twelfth through fourteenth centuries may encounter the term in its operational form.
Second, the underlying jurisdictional question — frankalmoin versus lay fee — was genuinely contested territory between royal and ecclesiastical courts in medieval England. Assisa de Utrum was one mechanism by which royal courts asserted authority to resolve that threshold dispute, rather than deferring entirely to canon law tribunals. Researchers studying the competition between secular and church courts in this period will find the writ illustrative of how procedural devices carried institutional stakes.
Third, because the writ is obsolete and highly specialized, it appears rarely in American legal sources. If it appears in an American legal text, it is almost certainly in a historical or comparative context, not as a live procedural tool.
Fourth, the Latin form of the name varies across sources. *Assisa de Utrum*, *Assise de Utrum*, and *Assize Utrum* all appear. Researchers searching historical corpora should account for these variants and for the possibility that sources will anglicize the term inconsistently.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary defines the term concisely: "An obsolete writ, which lay for the parson of a church whose predecessor had alienated the land and rents of it." This definition is accurate as far as it goes but omits the functional mechanism — the jury question about frankalmoin versus lay fee — that gave the writ its name and its historical significance. The *utrum* framing is not incidental; it was the procedural heart of the proceeding, and understanding it is necessary to situate the writ within the broader assize system.
Black's entry is also notable for what it does not say: it gives no account of the writ's origins, its relationship to Henry II's legal reforms, or its role in the ecclesiastical-versus-secular jurisdictional disputes that animated medieval English law. Researchers relying solely on Black's will have a correct but thin picture. Fuller treatment requires recourse to Bracton's *De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae* or Pollock and Maitland's *History of English Law*, both of which address the assize system and the frankalmoin tenure question in substantive depth.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Assisa de Utrum is a creature of medieval English law and has no equivalent or survival in American law. It appears in American legal dictionaries for completeness and historical reference only. Researchers working in any U.S. jurisdiction will encounter this term only in historical or comparative scholarship, never as operative procedure.
---