Definition
Consimili casu (Latin: "in a like case") is a historical writ of entry that arose under the Statute of Westminster II (13 Edw. I, c. 24, 1285). The writ was available to a reversioner — the person entitled to receive land back after a limited estate expired — when a tenant by the curtesy wrongfully alienated (transferred) that land in fee simple or for life, thereby threatening or defeating the reversioner's future interest.
A tenant by the curtesy was a husband who held his deceased wife's land for the duration of his own life, provided certain conditions were met. Because his estate was life-limited, he had no power to convey title beyond his own life. When such a tenant purported to grant the land in fee or for life to a third party, he conveyed more than he lawfully possessed. The writ of consimili casu gave the reversioner a remedy to recover the land.
The writ takes its name from the phrasing of the statute itself, which authorized courts to fashion new writs "in a like case" (in consimili casu) to existing writs — a significant grant of judicial flexibility in an era when the forms of action were strictly limited.
---
Common Confusion
Two distinct legal concepts share the Westminster II origin story and are easily conflated. The statute's general empowering clause — authorizing clerks in Chancery to issue new writs in cases similar to those already covered — is sometimes loosely called the "consimili casu" provision. The writ of consimili casu proper, however, is the specific writ of entry described above, not the general drafting authority. Researchers encountering "consimili casu" in historical sources should confirm whether the text refers to the writ itself or to the broader statutory principle of analogical writ-creation.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term appears almost exclusively in historical legal sources and is unlikely to arise in any modern litigation context. Researchers will encounter it primarily in three settings: (1) histories of the forms of action and the common law writ system; (2) scholarship on the Statute of Westminster II and its role in expanding common law remedies; and (3) older treatises and abridgments dealing with real property and estates.
A key research trap: Black's 1st and 2nd editions differ on the regnal year of Westminster II, citing 13 Edw. I and 18 Edw. I respectively. The correct date is 13 Edw. I (1285). The discrepancy in the 2nd edition appears to be a typographical error. Researchers relying on Black's 2nd edition for the statutory citation should verify against the primary source.
The broader significance of the consimili casu clause in Westminster II is substantial for legal historians: it gave royal courts a mechanism to extend remedies by analogy rather than waiting for Parliament to authorize each new writ individually. This contributed to the gradual expansion of the common law forms of action in the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The writ itself, however, had a narrow and specific function within real property law and should not be conflated with that broader legislative innovation.
Corpus researchers working in English legal history or property law sources dated before the mid-nineteenth century (when the forms of action were abolished in England) may encounter this writ in discussions of reversionary interests, curtesy estates, and the interplay between limited tenancies and alienation.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Both Black's editions define consimili casu as a writ of entry tied to Westminster II and describe its function in identical substantive terms: it protected reversioners against unauthorized alienation by tenants by the curtesy. The entries are brief and functional, offering no treatment of the writ's procedural operation, its relationship to other writs of entry, or its place within the broader forms of action system.
Neither edition addresses the writ's eventual obsolescence or the statutory reforms (particularly the Real Property Limitation Act 1833 and the Common Law Procedure Act 1852 in England) that rendered the old writ system inoperative. Researchers seeking deeper treatment will need to look beyond Black's to works such as Maitland's "Forms of Action at Common Law" or Holdsworth's "History of English Law," which situate this writ within the full arc of common law procedural history.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Consimili casu is a creature of English common law with no living counterpart in modern American or English jurisprudence. American courts adopted the forms of action from English practice, but the specific writ of consimili casu is not documented as having significant independent use in American colonial or early republic courts. Its relevance in U.S. legal research is almost entirely historical and doctrinal rather than jurisdictional.
---