Definition
In legal usage, "named" carries two related but distinct senses:
1. Identified by name. A person or party is named when they are designated specifically in a document, instrument, pleading, or legal proceeding — as distinguished from being described by class, role, or implication. A "named plaintiff," for example, is an individually identified party, as opposed to unnamed class members. A "named insured" is the specific person or entity identified in an insurance policy, as opposed to additional or incidental insureds covered by operation of law or policy terms.
2. Named nominatim. In the stricter historical sense drawn from equity and conveyancing practice, a person is "named" when identified by at least one personal name — Christian name or surname — even if not by both. This nominatim standard matters in contexts where the completeness of identification in a deed, will, trust, or order is contested.
In a looser secondary sense, "named" occasionally appears as a synonym for "mentioned" or "referred to" in a document, though this usage is generally regarded as imprecise.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Having a name; also, in computing, a function argument passed by name rather than by position.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Called by name; designated; mentioned by name.
The gap between common and legal usage is narrow but consequential. In ordinary speech, "named" simply means identified or called something. In legal instruments, the word carries a threshold question: has identification been sufficient to legally bind, convey, or confer rights? Being "named" in a will, policy, or pleading is not merely descriptive — it determines who holds a right, who is a proper party, and who may be bound by a judgment or instrument.
Common Confusion
Named vs. described. A person may be described in a document (by relationship, role, or class) without being named. Courts have had to determine whether description alone satisfies requirements that call for a party to be "named." The two concepts overlap but are not interchangeable, and the distinction can affect the validity of instruments or the scope of judgments.
Named party vs. unnamed class member. In class action practice, "named plaintiffs" (also called representative plaintiffs) are formally identified individuals, while unnamed class members are bound by the outcome without being individually named in the pleading. These categories carry different procedural rights and obligations.
Why It Matters in Research
The word "named" appears constantly in legal documents but rarely as a term of art requiring its own definition — which is precisely why researchers can miss its significance. When encountered in instruments, the relevant question is always: named by what standard, and sufficient for what purpose?
In insurance law, the "named insured" designation controls which parties have direct rights under a policy, standing to sue the insurer, and obligations to pay premiums. Researchers working in insurance coverage disputes should treat "named" as a term with specific policy and regulatory content that varies by lines of insurance and jurisdiction.
In pleadings and judgments, whether a party is named affects preclusion, service requirements, and enforcement. Historical sources may use "named" in contexts where modern practice would use "identified" or "designated" — treat these as equivalent unless the source signals otherwise.
The nominatim standard from equity practice (identification by at least one name) appears in older conveyancing and chancery materials. When reading historical deed or trust cases, a challenge to whether a party was properly "named" may turn on this standard rather than on the modern expectation of full legal name identification.
Researchers should also note that "named" intersects with privacy and identity law in modern contexts: the right to control one's name (appropriation torts), legal name change proceedings, and domain name law each treat "name" — and by extension "named" — as a legally significant designation rather than a mere label.
Historical Dictionary Support
Bouvier's entry is brief but precise on two points that remain useful. First, it establishes the nominatim standard: a person is named if identified by at least one name — Christian or surname — not necessarily both. The citation to 22 L.J. Ch. 393 grounds this in chancery practice, where precision in naming parties and beneficiaries was essential to the court's jurisdiction and to the enforceability of decrees. Second, Bouvier acknowledges the secondary, looser meaning of "named" as equivalent to "mentioned" or "referred to," but flags it as secondary and cites a source treating it with evident caution (34 S.J. 129).
What Bouvier's entry does not address — and what modern researchers will need to develop from other sources — is the substantial body of insurance law built around "named insured," the class action distinction between named and unnamed parties, and the statutory frameworks governing legal name changes. These are twentieth- and twenty-first-century developments that fall entirely outside the historical dictionary's scope.
Jurisdictional Note
The "named insured" concept is governed primarily by individual state insurance codes and policy form regulations, which vary. In class action practice, the named plaintiff standard is a feature of federal procedure (Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) and state analogs, which differ in some respects. Name change procedures are purely creatures of state statute and vary substantially in procedural requirements and grounds.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Family Law — Name Changes (Adults and Children in Family Proceedings) (The Law Mind Family Law Encyclopedia)
Defamation and Privacy Torts — Invasion of Privacy — Appropriation of Name or Likeness (The Law Mind Torts & Personal Injury Encyclopedia)
Domain Names, Cybersquatting, and the ACPA (The Law Mind Intellectual Property Encyclopedia)