Definition
Num is a Latin particle appearing in the formulas of several old English writs and legal actions. It functions as an interrogative prefix meaning roughly "whether" or "why," typically implying that a negative answer is expected. In legal contexts, num does not stand alone as a substantive term but is integral to writ names and phrases such as Num ejecit infra terminum and Quare (related writ families using interrogative Latin particles). The entries attributed to "Num" in historical legal dictionaries reflect either: (1) fragments of Latin writ phrases beginning with num or a related interrogative particle; (2) cross-references to the abbreviation form; or (3) editorial artifacts of alphabetical organization that grouped nearby writ entries under this heading.
Researchers should note that historical dictionary entries catalogued under "Num" typically describe two distinct writs: Num ejecit infra terminum (wherefore he ejected within the term), and writs of removal used to transfer a defendant from one court's custody to another. These are independent instruments and should not be conflated.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Abbreviation of "number" or "numeral."
Historical common usage: Not separately attested in Webster's 1913 as a standalone entry; treated as a Latin particle in classical references.
Editorial note: The abbreviation "num." in a legal text almost certainly means "number" or "numeral" and has no connection to the Latin interrogative particle num that appears in writ formulas. Researchers encountering "num" in a historical legal document must determine from context whether they are reading an abbreviated modern English word or a fragment of a Latin legal phrase.
Common Confusion
Num is easily misread as a standalone legal term when it is in fact a prefix element of a compound Latin writ name. The two most commonly associated writs — Num ejecit infra terminum and writs of removal — are unrelated to each other and happen to share only the accident of alphabetical proximity in historical dictionaries. Bouvier's entry under this heading pivots without transition into Quare impedit, a separate real action concerning advowsons; this reflects the organizational conventions of historical legal dictionaries, not any legal connection between the terms.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers consulting historical legal dictionaries should treat "Num" as a navigational artifact rather than a substantive legal term. Black's and Burrill's entries filed under this heading describe Num ejecit infra terminum, an archaic writ in the ejectment family, while Bouvier's entry migrates mid-text into Quare impedit. Neither the writ of removal described in Black's nor the Quare impedit discussed in Bouvier's has any intrinsic connection to the Latin particle num; they appear under this heading because of alphabetical sequencing conventions.
The writ Num ejecit infra terminum is a historical curiosity of real property practice. It lay for a lessee ejected before the expiration of a term where the wrongdoer was not personally in possession but had transferred to a feoffee or other claiming party. This distinguished it from ordinary ejectment actions and reflected the technical limits of earlier possessory remedies. The writ is obsolete in American practice and in modern English law.
For corpus researchers, the practical takeaway is: do not search for "num" as an independent legal concept. Search instead for the full writ name (Num ejecit infra terminum) or for the substantive doctrines — ejectment, term of years, feoffment, advowson — that the surrounding historical entries actually address.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary describes two separate instruments under or adjacent to this heading: a writ of removal transferring a person from one court's custody to another for purposes of being sued, and the writ Num ejecit infra terminum. The authorities cited — Blackstone's Commentaries (3 Bl. Comm. 129, 199, 206), Tidd's Practice, and Selwyn's Practice — are reliable sources for these writs in their English common law context.
Burrill's Law Dictionary cross-references a contraction and separately defines Num ejecit infra terminum in Latin law terms consistent with Black's, citing the same Blackstone passage (3 Bl. Com. 161) and Tidd's Practice.
Bouvier's entry is the most problematic for researchers: it pivots from a brief note about ejectment directly into a full discussion of Quare impedit — a real possessory action in the Court of Common Pleas to recover a right of presentation to an advowson when a patron's right of presentation is disturbed. This entry is substantively accurate regarding Quare impedit but organizationally confusing. Researchers following Bouvier here should treat the Quare impedit material as a separate entry that happens to be appended.
None of the historical dictionaries provides meaningful doctrinal coverage of num as a Latin particle in its own right. The Latin grammatical function of num — an interrogative particle implying a negative answer — is essential background for reading writ formulas but is not itself a legal concept requiring dictionary treatment.
Jurisdictional Note
The writs discussed under this heading are English common law instruments with no direct American counterpart. American courts abolished the forms of action under which these writs operated, and ejectment in American jurisdictions evolved along entirely different procedural lines.