Definition
"Previously" is an adverb of time used in legal instruments, pleadings, and statutes to assert that one act, condition, or state of affairs occurred before another. It functions as a relational marker, establishing temporal priority between two named events or circumstances — not merely that something happened in the past, but that it happened before a specific reference point named in the same document or provision.
In legal drafting, "previously" is more precise than "before" in some contexts because it explicitly compares two identified acts or states rather than fixing a single point in time against an external calendar. The word carries an implicit structure: a first act (the one described as previous) and a second act (the one to which the first is being compared), with the assertion that the first preceded the second.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): First; beforehand, in advance. At an earlier time; already.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Beforehand; antecedently; as, a plan previously formed.
In ordinary usage, "previously" simply means "before now" or "at an earlier time," with no necessary reference to a second event. In legal usage, the word almost always operates comparatively — it asserts priority of one act over another specifically identified act or state. A legal reader encountering "previously" in a contract, statute, or pleading should ask: previously relative to what? The answer is almost always supplied elsewhere in the same instrument.
Common Confusion
"Previously" is sometimes treated as interchangeable with "formerly," "before," or "prior to" in legal drafting, but the terms carry different implications. "Formerly" suggests a status that has since changed and no longer exists. "Prior to" is a prepositional phrase that anchors an act to a specific date or event. "Previously" asserts comparative temporal priority between two acts within the same legal context without necessarily implying that the earlier state has ended. Sloppy substitution among these terms can introduce ambiguity in instruments where sequence of acts carries legal consequence — such as lien priority, notice requirements, or the establishment of prior knowledge.
Why It Matters in Research
The research significance of "previously" lies almost entirely in its relational function. When you encounter the word in a historical deed, contract, statute, or pleading, it signals that a temporal comparison is being drawn — and identifying both terms of that comparison is essential to understanding the provision.
In older instruments, "previously" sometimes appears in contexts where modern drafting would use "prior to" or a precise date reference. This can create ambiguity when the second reference point is unclear or when the document has been excerpted. Researchers working with historical deeds or conveyances should be alert to whether "previously" refers to a named prior instrument, a prior act of a party, or a prior legal status — each carries different consequences for chain of title or priority disputes.
In statutory construction, courts have occasionally needed to define "previously" when the word appears in criminal recidivist provisions, sentencing enhancements, or notice requirements. In those contexts, whether a conviction, act, or notice occurred "previously" relative to a charged offense or triggering event can determine the legal outcome. The word's meaning in those provisions is fixed by statutory context, not by general usage.
For corpus researchers, "previously" is not a term of art in the way that "consideration" or "easement" is — it has no independent substantive legal meaning that varies by jurisdiction or era. Its significance is always contextual and comparative. When indexing or searching historical sources, treat it as a structural marker pointing toward a temporal relationship that must be resolved by reading the surrounding text.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary, Bouvier's Law Dictionary, and the supplemental second edition of Black's are in complete agreement on the definition of "previously." All three derive their formulation — and apparently their sole authority — from Lebrecht v. Wilcoxon, 40 Iowa 94, an Iowa case that supplied the functional definition: an adverb of time used in comparing an act or state named with another act or state, subsequent in order of time, for the purpose of asserting the priority of the first.
The unanimity across sources is notable but also tells a story of limited development. "Previously" received a dictionary entry not because it generated sustained doctrinal controversy, but because a single case required a court to articulate what the word does grammatically and legally. The historical dictionaries add no further case law, no statutory treatment, and no jurisdictional variation. Researchers should understand that the historical record on this term is thin by design — it is a functional word, not a term of art — and that the Iowa formulation, while useful, represents one court's analysis rather than a broadly litigated doctrine.
What the historical dictionaries do not address is the word's behavior in modern statutory interpretation disputes, particularly in criminal sentencing contexts where the meaning of "previously convicted" has been extensively litigated. That body of law lies entirely outside the historical dictionary record.