Definition
A Latin law phrase meaning "that you have the body, to do and to receive." *Dum et recipiendum* is a writ that formerly issued out of the courts of Westminster Hall directing the production of a person's body before the court — not merely to answer to a charge, but to do and to receive whatever the court might order. It belongs to the family of Latin writs commanding physical production of a person, and functions as a variant of the habeas corpus family adapted to the specific procedural context of the Westminster courts.
The phrase itself is elliptical. Its full operative meaning is anchored in the formula *habeas corpus dum et recipiendum* — that is, produce the body to do (perform some act required by the court) and to receive (accept whatever judgment or order the court pronounces). The writ thus served a dual function: ensuring the party's presence to act and to be acted upon by the court's authority.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering this phrase in historical English legal records or pleading documents should understand it as a term of art embedded in the Westminster Hall procedural system — a system that no longer exists in its original form. The phrase will appear most commonly in older English practice manuals, form books, and writ registers rather than in modern legal proceedings. It is unlikely to appear in American practice at all, as the colonial and early American legal systems did not transplant the full range of Westminster writ variants.
The chief trap for researchers is conflating this writ with the better-known habeas corpus forms, particularly *habeas corpus ad subjiciendum* (the great writ of liberty) or *habeas corpus ad respondendum* (to answer a charge). Those writs have well-documented modern equivalents and voluminous case law. *Dum et recipiendum* is a narrower procedural instrument with no living equivalent and almost no secondary literature. Researchers should not assume that doctrine surrounding the better-known habeas writs applies to this form.
When tracing this term through historical sources, look first to English writ registers and practice texts from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Burrill preserves a fragment of the entry; fuller treatments may appear in older English practice manuals such as Tidd's *Practice* or Chitty's *Practice*. The absence of this writ from American sources is itself informative — it signals the degree to which American courts selectively adopted English writ practice.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary provides the core entry, identifying the writ as one that issues from the courts of Westminster Hall. The entry is incomplete as preserved, cutting off mid-sentence, which is itself a research signal: the writ was sufficiently obscure even by Burrill's era that it received only abbreviated treatment. Burrill translates the phrase accurately as "you have the body, to do and receive," and correctly situates it in the practice of the Westminster courts.
No other historical dictionaries in the Law Mind corpus appear to have catalogued this term independently. The absence from American legal dictionaries such as Black's or Bouvier's is consistent with the writ's purely English procedural origin and its failure to take root in American courts. Researchers should treat Burrill's fragment as a pointer to English primary sources rather than a complete account.
Jurisdictional Note
This writ is an instrument of English common law practice originating in the Westminster courts. It has no recognized American equivalent and is not part of the writ practice of any U.S. state or federal court. Research on this term is properly directed to English legal history sources.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia — Writs (for the broader taxonomy of common law writs and the Westminster system); Habeas Corpus (for the family of body-production writs to which this form belongs).