Definition
In civil and canon law, a reconventio is a cross-demand brought by the defendant (reus) against the plaintiff (actor) within the same proceeding. Rather than initiating a separate action, the defendant uses the reconventio to assert an independent or related claim against the party who sued him, consolidating both demands before the same tribunal. The device is procedurally analogous to a cross bill in equity and is understood as a direct ancestor of modern counterclaim and cross-claim practice in common law systems. In jurisdictions that received civil law influence — most notably Louisiana — reconventio survived as a recognized term of practice and gave rise to what Louisiana procedure calls the reconventional demand.
Common Confusion
Reconventio is sometimes loosely equated with a general counterclaim or set-off, but the terms are not interchangeable. A set-off is a defensive tool that operates to reduce or extinguish the plaintiff's recovery; reconventio is an affirmative demand that can exceed the plaintiff's claim and result in a judgment against the original plaintiff. Similarly, reconventio is distinct from a cross bill in equity, though the two serve parallel functions. The cross bill is an English equity procedure developed within the Chancery system; reconventio is the civil law antecedent from which the cross bill is historically derived, not a synonym for it.
Why It Matters in Research
The primary research significance of reconventio is its role as a bridge term between civilian procedural tradition and modern Anglo-American practice. Researchers tracing the doctrinal origins of counterclaim rules — including the compulsory counterclaim requirements codified in modern procedural codes — will encounter reconventio in treatises on equity pleading and civil law sources. Story's Equity Pleading treats the cross bill as having developed from the civilian reconventio, making this term relevant to any historical inquiry into that evolution.
In Louisiana sources, reconventio and its English derivative reconventional demand appear in pleadings and decisions well into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Researchers working in Louisiana legal history should expect the term to appear in French and Spanish colonial records as well as early American-era Louisiana court filings, reflecting the state's mixed civil-common law heritage. A document using reconventio without further explanation almost certainly originates in a civil law jurisdiction or a civilian-influenced equity context.
The term is effectively dormant in contemporary practice outside Louisiana and comparative law scholarship. Its appearance in a modern document is a strong signal that the drafter is working from historical sources, operating in a civilian tradition, or writing comparatively. Researchers should not assume that reconventio in an older source maps cleanly onto the procedural rules of any particular modern jurisdiction without checking the applicable procedural code.
One navigational trap: Burrill's entry is truncated, cutting off mid-sentence in the Louisiana reference. Researchers relying on that entry for Louisiana-specific practice should consult primary Louisiana procedural sources rather than treating Burrill as authoritative on the state law details.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary provides the core civilian definition: a cross-demand by the reus upon the actor, characterized as a proceeding in the nature of a cross bill in equity and identified as the origin of the cross bill. Burrill cites Hallifax's Analysis of the Civil Law, Calvin's Lexicon, Fleta, Gilbert's Forum Romanum, and Story's Equity Pleading — a standard cluster of authorities for civil law procedure in nineteenth-century American legal scholarship. The entry confirms Louisiana usage but is unfortunately cut off before completing the jurisdictional note, leaving the scope of its Louisiana treatment uncertain.
No other historical dictionaries are represented in the available source material. The civilian treatise tradition represented by Burrill's citations — particularly Hallifax and Story — would be the natural next stop for deeper historical research. Story's Equity Pleading section 402, cited by Burrill, directly addresses the relationship between reconventio and the cross bill and is the most developed English-language treatment of the concept available from that era.
Jurisdictional Note
Reconventio as a term of active practice is principally associated with Louisiana, where it underpins the reconventional demand under Louisiana's Code of Civil Procedure. Civil law jurisdictions in Europe and Latin America preserve analogous institutions under varying names. Common law jurisdictions absorbed the functional equivalent through counterclaim rules without retaining the Latin terminology.