Definition
Entry in casu consimili (Latin: "entry in a similar case") was a common law real action by which a person who had a right of entry to land could recover possession where the circumstances of their claim were analogous to—but not precisely covered by—an existing writ. The action derived from the Statute of Marlbridge (1267) and the Statute of Westminster II (1285), the latter of which authorized chancery clerks to fashion new writs "in consimili casu" (in a similar case) where an existing writ covered a closely analogous set of facts but the new plaintiff's situation fell outside its precise language. Applied to real actions, the entry in casu consimili was the vehicle through which a lord or other claimant could re-enter lands that had been aliened in circumstances mirroring those enumerated in prior statutes, but not word-for-word identical to them.
The action was part of the broader family of writs of entry—possessory real actions occupying the middle ground between the older, more cumbersome real actions (such as the writ of right) and the personal actions that eventually displaced them. Its distinguishing feature was its adaptability: it existed precisely to accommodate factual situations that fit the spirit, but not the letter, of enumerated writs.
---
Common Confusion
Entry in casu consimili is frequently conflated with two related concepts. First, the broader doctrine of in consimili casu under the Statute of Westminster II, which was the legislative authority empowering chancery to create new writs generally—not a writ unto itself. The entry in casu consimili is a specific application of that doctrine to real actions involving entry to land. Second, researchers sometimes confuse this action with the writ of entry sur disseisin or other named writs of entry. The distinction matters: those writs addressed enumerated, specific circumstances; entry in casu consimili addressed the gaps between them.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term belongs almost entirely to the pre-modern common law of real property and will appear in English legal sources from the late thirteenth century through the seventeenth century, tapering off as real actions were supplanted by ejectment. Researchers consulting early English land records, plea rolls, or common law treatise literature (Coke, Fitzherbert, Bracton) will encounter it in that context.
Several navigational traps deserve attention:
First, Latin variation. Corpus sources may render this as "entry in consimili casu," "entry in casu consimili," or abbreviate it without the "entry" designation entirely. The phrase in consimili casu will also appear in non-real-action contexts—particularly in equity and chancery sources discussing the power to extend writs generally—so the surrounding subject matter must be used to identify whether the real action is the subject.
Second, the Statute of Westminster II is the foundational legislative text. Any early source discussing entry in casu consimili will be working in the shadow of that statute (13 Edw. I, c. 24), and researchers should treat the statute as the primary anchor when interpreting conflicting doctrinal descriptions.
Third, the action's historical position within the writ-of-entry family means it appears in texts organized by the "degrees" of writs of entry—a classification scheme (sur disseisin, in the per, in the per and cui, and so on) that can be confusing to modern researchers. Entry in casu consimili sat somewhat outside the degree structure precisely because it was a gap-filler.
Fourth, by the time American legal sources discuss this term at all, the action was already a legal antiquity. American colonial and early republic practice did not meaningfully transplant the writ-of-entry family; ejectment had largely displaced real actions. Any American source mentioning this term is almost certainly doing so in a historical or comparative capacity.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence define the action concisely as a writ of entry given by the Statute of Westminster II to a reversioner whose tenant had aliened in fee or in tail, where the facts were analogous ("in similar case") to those covered by an existing statutory writ. This is the core of the entry and consistent with the treatise tradition.
The source does not address the broader doctrinal history of the Statute of Westminster II's in consimili casu provision, nor the relationship of this action to the decline of real actions generally. Researchers relying solely on Rapalje & Lawrence will have an accurate but narrow definition and should supplement with Coke's commentary on the relevant Statute of Westminster II provisions or Fitzherbert's Natura Brevium for the practice-oriented detail that historical dictionary entries do not supply.
---
Jurisdictional Note
This is an English common law action with no meaningful American counterpart. It was never adopted as a living procedural tool in American courts. American legal dictionary definitions, where they exist, are purely historical glosses. Research utility is essentially confined to English legal history and comparative common law contexts.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: WRITS — for the broader framework of common law writs and the significance of Westminster II in writ development.
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: REAL ACTIONS — for the writ-of-entry family and the displacement of real actions by ejectment.
---