Definition
A resolution is a formal expression of opinion, intent, or decision adopted by a deliberative body — such as a legislature, board of directors, town council, or public assembly. The term carries at least three distinct legal contexts:
1. Legislative and governmental bodies. A resolution is the recorded output of a vote or deliberation, short of a statute or ordinance. It may express the sense of a legislative chamber, authorize a specific action, or direct internal operations. Unlike a statute, a resolution typically does not create binding law of general application; it speaks to what the body has decided, declared, or authorized at a particular moment.
2. Corporate and organizational governance. A resolution is a formal action taken by a board of directors, shareholder meeting, or similar body, typically to authorize transactions, ratify decisions, or record official positions. Corporate resolutions are operative documents — banks, counterparties, and courts rely on them to confirm that an officer had authority to act.
3. Legal proceedings (historical usage). In older practice, particularly in Scots and English common law, "resolution" could refer to the judgment or determination of a court. Burrill records this usage with citations to Mod. reports. It also appears in the Scots law phrase "resolutive condition" — a condition that, upon occurrence, extinguishes a previously granted right. This usage is largely archaic in American practice but surfaces in historical records and civil law-influenced jurisdictions.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A firm or official decision; a strong personal will or vow; in technology, the fineness of image detail expressed in pixels.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): The act or process of resolving — separating a compound into its elements, solving a difficult problem, or the state of being relaxed.
Editorial note: Both everyday senses (a personal New Year's resolution) and the technical image-resolution sense share a root meaning of "solving" or "settling," but neither captures the legal function of a resolution as an operative instrument of collective decision-making. In law, the word is almost always institutional — it is something a body adopts, not something an individual forms. Researchers encountering the term in corporate records or legislative archives should not map the ordinary personal-decision sense onto it.
---
Common Confusion
Resolution vs. Ordinance vs. Statute: These terms are frequently conflated when reviewing the output of governmental bodies. A statute is legislation of general application enacted through the full legislative process. An ordinance is the equivalent at the local level — it has the force of local law. A resolution typically does not have general legal force; it records a decision or position of the body without enacting new law. Some jurisdictions blur these lines, particularly at the municipal level, and courts have been called upon to determine whether a particular instrument was a resolution (non-binding as law) or an ordinance (binding). Researchers using historical sources should not assume consistent usage.
Resolution vs. Motion: A motion is a proposal put before a deliberative body. A resolution is (usually) what results when a motion is adopted. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably in lay records and older documents, but in formal parliamentary and legal usage they are distinct stages of the same process.
---
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES
Simple Resolution: Adopted by only one chamber of a bicameral legislature; addresses internal operations or expresses the opinion of that chamber alone. Not presented to the executive; does not have the force of law.
Concurrent Resolution: Adopted by both chambers of a bicameral legislature but not presented for executive signature. Used to express the sense of the legislature, make housekeeping arrangements between chambers, or propose constitutional amendments for ratification by the states.
Joint Resolution: Adopted by both chambers and, in most contexts, presented to the executive for signature or veto. In federal practice, a joint resolution may carry the force of law and is the mechanism for proposing constitutional amendments to the states.
Corporate Resolution: A formal action of a board of directors or shareholders, often required to authorize significant transactions, borrowing, or officer appointments. Frequently demanded by banks and transactional counterparties as evidence of authority.
Resolutive Condition (Civil Law): A condition attached to a legal right such that, upon its occurrence, the right is extinguished. Derived from the maxim resoluto jure concedentis, resolvitur jus concessum — where the grantor's right is extinguished, the right granted is extinguished with it.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The most critical research trap with "resolution" is the assumption that any formal output of a deliberative body has the same legal weight. Legislative history research requires distinguishing simple, concurrent, and joint resolutions from statutes — conflating them can produce a fundamentally wrong understanding of what law was enacted and when. Courts have held that simple and concurrent resolutions are not law, and their use as interpretive tools in statutory construction is contested.
In corporate records, particularly historical ones, the word "resolution" may appear in minute books without consistent formatting or labeling. Early corporate records sometimes recorded resolutions as narrative minutes rather than as separately headed instruments. A researcher looking for authorization of a specific action may need to read through minutes carefully rather than expecting a clearly titled "Resolution of the Board."
The civil law usage — resolutive condition and the resoluto jure maxim — appears in Burrill and in civil law-influenced materials (Louisiana, Quebec, Scots law sources) but is absent from most modern American common law dictionaries. Researchers working in those jurisdictions or with historical civil law materials should be alert to the doctrinal content of the term that standard American sources will not supply.
The corporate resolution's role in authority and agency questions gives it outsized importance in transactional disputes. Whether an officer was authorized to bind a corporation often turns entirely on what a resolution said — or failed to say. Historical corporate resolutions may also establish the chain of authorization for property transfers, loans, and contracts that surface in later litigation.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's (1st and 2nd editions) are in close agreement, defining resolution as both the determination of a deliberative body and a motion offered for adoption — recognizing the ambiguity between the proposal and the adopted result. Both editions note that in legislative practice the term is used where the subject matter would not properly constitute a statute, which is the core legislative-practice distinction still operative today.
Rapalje & Lawrence gives the tightest functional definition: "an expression of opinion or intention by a meeting." This formulation usefully strips out the question of legal force and focuses on what a resolution actually is — a recorded collective expression. It aligns with modern corporate practice where resolutions often do precisely this: record what the board has decided without themselves being the operative legal document.
Anderson's Dictionary of Law cross-references only to BY-LAW, which is unhelpfully thin. The entry suggests Anderson treated resolution as subsumed within the broader category of organizational rules, which misses the transactional and legislative dimensions.
Burrill's is the outlier of the group, focusing on the judicial and civil law senses — court judgment and resolutive condition. These uses are absent from Black's entirely, reflecting the divergence between common law American practice (which had little use for "resolution" as a court judgment) and the Scots/civil law tradition Burrill drew on. Burrill's entry is essential for any researcher working with older English reports or civil law materials where the term carries this distinct meaning.
No historical source in this set gives adequate treatment to the distinction between simple, concurrent, and joint resolutions in bicameral legislatures — a gap that reflects how much the constitutional significance of that distinction developed through twentieth-century practice and litigation.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Louisiana and other civil law-influenced jurisdictions preserve the resolutive condition doctrine in ways that common law states do not, making Burrill's civil law sense of the term operationally relevant there. At the municipal level, whether a local governmental action qualifies as a resolution or an ordinance — and what legal force follows — varies by state enabling statute and local charter. Researchers should not assume uniform treatment across state lines.
---