Definition
A writ of English origin, issued under royal authority, that formally empowered an attorney to appear in court on behalf of a defendant. Before the enactment of the Statute of Westminster II (1285), a party had no right to be represented by an attorney in court without first obtaining this writ. The writ was the procedural mechanism by which the Crown delegated the authority to substitute an attorney's appearance for the personal appearance of the party.
The name translates roughly as "we have given power for making an attorney" — a formula reflecting the writ's function as a grant of representational authority.
Why It Matters in Research
This term appears almost exclusively in sources dealing with early and medieval English common law procedure. Researchers encountering it in historical pleadings, treatises, or case records should treat it as a marker of pre-statutory legal practice predating formalized rights of legal representation.
The critical transition point is the Statute of Westminster II (13 Edw. I, c. 10, 1285), which reorganized and expanded the rights of parties to appear by attorney. After that statute, the need for this specific writ diminished, and it largely disappears from active legal usage. Sources that postdate Westminster II may reference the writ in a historical or explanatory capacity rather than as a living procedural tool.
Researchers should also note the significant variation in spelling across historical sources. The Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) entry itself renders the term as "Dedimus Fotestatem De Attorno Faciendo" — a transcription artifact likely introduced in typesetting. Authoritative legal Latin renders it as "Dedimus Potestatem de Attornato Faciendo." When searching manuscript records, court rolls, or early printed legal sources, both spellings and their variants may appear. Failure to account for this orthographic instability will produce incomplete search results.
This writ is conceptually upstream from the modern attorney-client relationship. It illuminates that the right of legal representation in English law was not self-evident but required affirmative royal sanction. That historical context is useful when researching the foundations of attorney authority, the development of agency in legal proceedings, and the transformation of court procedure across the medieval and early modern periods.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) is the sole source dictionary providing a formal entry, and its coverage is minimal — a single-sentence description identifying the writ, its issuing authority, and its pre-Westminster II procedural function. The entry contains the typographical corruption noted above ("Fotestatem" for "Potestatem"), which limits its reliability as a standalone reference.
Historical legal dictionaries and treatises on early English practice — including Glanvill and Bracton — address attorney appointment in the broader procedural context, though the specific writ formula may appear under variant terminology. Researchers seeking fuller treatment should consult histories of English legal procedure rather than relying on dictionary entries alone. Secondary sources on the development of the legal profession and the law of agency in England will provide the interpretive depth that dictionary coverage does not.
Jurisdictional Note
This writ is exclusively a product of English common law and has no direct American counterpart. It did not transplant into American practice, where attorney representation developed under different statutory and constitutional frameworks from an early period.