Definition
A Latin term meaning "of portions" or "of shares." In its legal application, *portionis* refers to a writ that lay where a person was distrained (i.e., had their property seized) for rent that ought to have been paid proportionately by others alongside them. The writ functioned as a remedy for a tenant or co-obligor who was made to bear the full burden of a distraint that should have been distributed among multiple parties, each responsible for their proportionate share.
The writ compelled an apportionment of the rent obligation so that no single party was unfairly subjected to seizure for a debt shared among several.
Common Confusion
Black's Law Dictionary entry for *portionis* as it appears in some editions contains text that appears to be a printing or compilation error — the definition given describes the Statute of De Donis Conditionalibus (13 Edw. I, c. 1, 1285), which converted conditional fee-simples into fee-tail estates. That statute has no substantive connection to the writ of *portionis*. Rapalje & Lawrence correctly identifies *portionis* as the proportionate distraint remedy. Researchers encountering the Black's entry should treat it with caution and cross-reference Rapalje & Lawrence, Fitzherbert's *Natura Brevium*, and *Termes de la Ley* for the accurate definition.
Why It Matters in Research
*Portionis* is a narrow, archaic writ of limited independent significance, but it surfaces in research on medieval and early modern English land law, particularly in the context of distraint, apportionment of rent, and the relationship among co-tenants or co-obligors. Several points are worth noting:
First, the Black's Law Dictionary entry is unreliable for this term. The text transplanted into the *portionis* entry appears to belong to a discussion of De Donis or a neighboring entry, suggesting a typesetting or editorial error in one or more editions. Researchers using Black's for this term should verify against primary sources.
Second, the writ belongs to a family of medieval English remedies designed to prevent unjust concentration of liability. Understanding *portionis* requires familiarity with the law of distraint generally — how landlords could seize goods for unpaid rent, and how tenants could challenge or redistribute that burden.
Third, Fitzherbert's *Natura Brevium* (cited as F. N. B. 234 in Rapalje & Lawrence) is the most useful primary source for the writ's form and function. *Termes de la Ley*, an early English legal glossary, also provides a contemporaneous definition. These are the appropriate places to anchor research, not modern secondary dictionaries.
Fourth, the term is unlikely to appear in American legal sources except in historical or comparative contexts. Its relevance is essentially confined to English legal history prior to the abolition of the old forms of action.
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence provides the operative definition: a writ available where one party was distrained for rent that others ought to have paid proportionately. The citation to Fitzherbert's *Natura Brevium* at folio 234 and to *Termes de la Ley* anchors the definition in recognized early modern English legal authorities.
Black's Law Dictionary, by contrast, supplies a definition that describes entirely different legal subject matter — the conversion of conditional fees into fee-tail estates under De Donis Conditionalibus. This is almost certainly a compilation error. The De Donis content is well-documented elsewhere and does not pertain to the writ of *portionis*. Historical dictionaries on the whole provide thin coverage of this writ, consistent with its status as a highly specific and seldom-litigated remedy.
Jurisdictional Note
The writ of *portionis* is a creature of English common law and has no American common law counterpart. American jurisdictions abolished the old forms of action through procedural reforms beginning in the nineteenth century. This term has no operative legal significance in contemporary U.S. practice.