Definition
An obsolete spelling and form of the term "interpleader." Enterpleder appears in early English legal writing as a variant designation for the procedural device by which a party holding property or funds claimed by two or more adverse claimants could compel those claimants to litigate their competing claims against each other, relieving the holder of the risk of double liability. The term is not in active use; any substantive research on the doctrine should be conducted under INTERPLEADER.
Common Confusion
Enterpleder and interpleader are the same concept. The variation is orthographic and historical, not substantive. Researchers encountering "enterpleder" in early English legal texts, manuscript sources, or antiquarian legal dictionaries should treat it as a direct equivalent to interpleader and pursue the doctrine under that heading. No independent body of law or procedure attaches to the older spelling.
Why It Matters in Research
The primary research value of this entry is navigational. A researcher working through early English legal authorities — particularly those drawing on older civilian or ecclesiastical sources — may encounter "enterpleder" and be uncertain whether it refers to something distinct from the familiar interpleader procedure. It does not. Cowell's Interpreter, cited as the source of the spelling by Burrill, was an early seventeenth-century legal glossary that preserved archaic and Latinized forms of English legal terms; its vocabulary sometimes diverges in spelling from the forms that became standard in later common law practice.
The practical trap is in full-text corpus searching. A search limited to "interpleader" will miss instances where early sources use "enterpleder" or other variant spellings. Researchers using Law Mind's historical corpus for equity procedure, particularly in chancery practice materials predating the nineteenth century, should run variant-spelling searches when completeness matters.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary identifies enterpleder simply as "the old form of Interpleader" used by Cowell, and directs the reader to the interpleader entry. This is the entirety of Burrill's treatment, and it is sufficient: the entry exists to catch the variant form, not to define an independent doctrine. No substantive divergence between the historical and modern understanding of the underlying procedure is signaled by the spelling difference. Historical dictionaries beyond Burrill are unlikely to add material content under this heading; the doctrine's history is carried entirely in the interpleader lineage.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: Interpleader