LLARONS

2 definitions found across Law Mind sources

← Dictionary
LLARONSAuthored
The Law Mind • 590 words
Definition
"Llarons" is an archaic or variant spelling of "larrons," itself a historical plural form of the Old French and Latin-derived term for thieves or robbers. As it appears in older English legal texts, the word denotes persons who commit larceny — that is, those who unlawfully take and carry away the personal property of another with intent to deprive the owner of it permanently. The term does not appear as a defined legal category in modern law; it survives only in historical legal writing and formulaic pleadings drawn from the medieval and early modern common law tradition.
Common Confusion
"Llarons" is easily mistaken for a typographical error or a meaningless string, particularly in OCR-processed historical texts where double letters are prone to garbling. It is not a corruption of a different legal concept — it is simply an older spelling of a word meaning thieves, synonymous with "larrons" and cognate with larceners or felons who commit theft. Do not conflate with "larons" (a surname appearing in unrelated legal records) or dismiss as a scanning artifact without first checking the manuscript or print context.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering "llarons" in primary sources are almost certainly working with early English manuscripts, plea rolls, or heavily Latinized legal documents where orthographic variation was common and spelling was not standardized. The double-l spelling reflects the inconsistency of transcription in pre-modern legal records, particularly those filtered through Anglo-Norman or Latin copyist conventions. The practical trap: a keyword search for "larceny" or "thief" will not surface this spelling. Researchers working in digitized historical corpora — Year Books, early plea rolls, abridgements, or transcribed criminal records — should search variant spellings including "larron," "larrons," "larons," and "llarons" to ensure full retrieval. This term has no operative legal meaning in any modern jurisdiction. Its significance is entirely documentary and historical. A researcher citing a source that uses "llarons" should treat it as equivalent to "thieves" in context and cross-reference the surrounding text against the doctrine of larceny as it was understood at the time of the document.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) does not define "llarons" as a standalone entry. The fragment preserved in the source material for this entry appears as contextual matter within the entry for larceny, specifically in the discussion of constructive larceny and compound larceny. The references to "2 Hast. P.C. 685" and "1 Leach, 212" point to Matthew Hale's Historia Placitorum Coronae and Leach's Crown Cases — both foundational English criminal law treatises of the 17th and 18th centuries — where the terminology of "llarons" or "larrons" would have appeared naturally in passages drawing on older authority. Historical dictionaries generally do not treat this spelling variant as a separate entry. It appears, when at all, as incidental vocabulary in discussions of larceny's common law development. No historical legal dictionary in the Law Mind corpus appears to define "llarons" independently. Researchers should not expect definition support from secondary sources; the term is best decoded through the primary documents themselves.
Related Terms
Larceny — the substantive offense to which this term relates Larcener / Larcenist — modern equivalents for the person who commits larceny Compound Larceny — aggravated form of theft discussed in the same Black's passage Simple Larceny — the baseline offensedistinguished from compound larceny Constructive Larceny — larceny made out by conduct rather than apparent initial felonious intent Felon — broader category encompassing llarons under early common law classification Theft — the modern statutory equivalent in most jurisdictions
LLARONSmain
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) • 1910
made out by construction from the defendant's conduct, although, originally, the taking was not apparently felonious. 2 Hast, P. C.-685; 1 Leach, 212.—Compound larceny. Larceny or theft accomplished by taking the thing stolen either from one’s person or from his house; otherwise called “mixed” larceny, and distinguished from “simple” or “plain” larceny, in which the theft is not aggravated by such an intrusion either upon the person or the dwelling. Anderson v. Winfree, 85 Ky. 597, 4 S. W. 301; State v. Chambers, 22 W. Va. 786, 46 Am. Rep. 550.—Grand larceny. In criminal law. In England, simple larceny. was originally divided into two sorts,—grand larceny, where the value of the goods stolen was above twelve pence, and petit larceny, where their value was ual to or below that sum. 4 BI. Comm. 22). The distinction was abolished in England by St. 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 29, and is not generally re ognized in the United States, although in a few states there is a statutory offense of grand larceny, one essential element of which is the value of the goods stolen, which value varies from $7 in Vermont to $50 in California. See State v. Bean, 74 Vt. 111, 52 Atl. 269; Fallon v. People, 2 Keyes (N. Y.) 147; ‘People v.- Murray, 8 Cal. 520; State v. Kennedy, &S Mo. 343.—Larceny by bailee. In Pennsylvania law. The crime of larceny committed where Ral person, being a bailee of any property, shall fraudulently take or convert the same to his own use, or to the use of any other person except the owner thereof, although he shall not break bulk or otherwise determine the bailment.” Brightly’s Purd. Dig. p. 436, § 177. And see Welsh v. People. 17 Ill. 339; State v. Skinner, 29 Or. 499, 46 Pac. 368.—Larceny from the person. Larceny committed where the property stolen is on the person or in the immediate charge or custody of the person from whom the theft is made, but without such circumstances of force or violence as would constitute Seagas f including oe as and such crimes. illiams v. S.. 3 App. D.C. State v. Eno, 8 Minn. 220 (Gil. 190).— 345; Mixed larceny. Otherwise called ‘‘comound” or “complicated larceny;” that whieh is attended with circumstances of aggravation or violence to the person. or taking from a house.—Petit larceny. The larceny of things whose value was below a certain arbitrary standard, at common.law twelve pence. See Ex parte Bell, 19 Fla. 612: Barnhart v. State, 154 Ind. 177, 56 N. E. 212; People v. Righetti, 66 Cal. 184, 4 Pac. 1185.—Simple larceny. Larceny which is not complicated or aggravated with acts of violence. Larceny from the person, or with force and violence, is called “compound” larceny. See State v. ‘Chambers, 22 W. Va. 786, 46 Am. Rep. 550; Anderson y. Winfree. 85 Ky. 597. 4 S. W. 351; Pitcher v. People, 16 Mich. 142.

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

SubscribeEncyclopediaSign In
The Law Mind Legal Dictionary. This is a legal research library, not a lawyer.
Dictionary • Encyclopedia • Sign In