Definition
A Latin writ directed to the sheriff commanding him to proceed to the election of a coroner. The writ was the formal mechanism by which a vacancy in the office of coroner was filled through a local electoral process, with the sheriff acting as the officer responsible for conducting the election. The name translates literally as "for the choosing of a coroner."
Why It Matters in Research
This is a narrow, archaic writ of English origin that will appear almost exclusively in historical legal sources predating the widespread adoption of statutory appointment processes for coroners. Researchers encountering this term in older materials should treat it as a marker of the common law office of coroner rather than any modern analog — the writ itself has no operative existence in American jurisdictions, which replaced the elective or appointive coroner system through legislation, and in many states replaced the coroner's office entirely with a medical examiner system.
The writ belongs to a family of prerogative and administrative writs that governed the filling of public offices in English practice. When researching historical coroner proceedings or office-holding disputes in English or early American records, this writ may appear alongside records of inquisitions, inquests, and related coroner functions. Its presence in a historical document signals a formal vacancy proceeding, not a routine inquest or administrative action.
Note that Burrill's entry redirects to the fuller form DE CORONATORE ELIGENDO. Researchers using Burrill's for this term will find no substantive treatment under this heading and must follow the cross-reference. Black's provides only a brief functional description. Neither source discusses the procedural context in depth, which means researchers needing the mechanics of the writ — who could petition for it, under what circumstances, and what the election entailed — will need to consult English legal history sources and treatises on the common law office of coroner directly.
Historical Dictionary Support
The two sources in the Law Mind corpus treat this term sparingly and consistently. Black's defines it as a writ to the sheriff commanding a coroner election, which is accurate and sufficient as a baseline. Burrill's declines to define it independently, instead directing the reader to the fuller Latin form DE CORONATORE ELIGENDO — a common practice in Burrill's for variant or abbreviated Latin writ names where a more complete entry exists elsewhere.
Neither source provides historical depth on when the writ issued, what body authorized it, or how it interacted with the broader common law framework governing public office vacancies. This is a limitation of dictionary treatment generally: writ names in Latin were often given the briefest entries in legal dictionaries, with substantive treatment reserved for treatises on pleading and practice. Researchers should not expect these entries to resolve questions about the writ's procedural operation.
The agreement between the two sources — that this writ concerned the election of a coroner directed to the sheriff — is reliable as far as it goes. Neither source contradicts the other, and neither adds information the other lacks, making the corpus treatment on this term thin but consistent.
Jurisdictional Note
This writ is a product of English common law with no surviving procedural counterpart in modern American practice. Coroner selection today is governed entirely by state statute and varies widely — some states retain elected coroners, others use appointed coroners, and many have transitioned to appointed medical examiners. The writ has no modern application in any American jurisdiction.