Definition
To restrain, in legal usage, means to limit, restrict, or prohibit action — by court order, by operation of law, or by the terms of a legal instrument. The word carries three related but distinct applications in legal contexts:
1. To prohibit a person or entity from taking a specific action, typically by court order (as in a restraining order or injunction).
2. To abridge or narrow a legal right or power, as in a restraining statute that limits common-law authority, or a deed that imposes restraints on alienation.
3. To physically confine or deprive of liberty, as in the context of false imprisonment or unlawful restraint.
The connecting thread across all three senses is limitation: restraint cuts down freedom of action, whether that freedom is physical, contractual, commercial, or judicial.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): To control or keep in check; to deprive of liberty; to restrict or limit.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): To hold back from acting, proceeding, or advancing, either by physical or moral force or by any interposing obstacle; to repress or suppress; to hinder from unlimited enjoyment; to abridge.
The common and legal meanings overlap substantially, but legal usage is more precise about the mechanism of restraint. In ordinary language, restraint can be informal or self-imposed. In law, restraint almost always implies an external, authoritative limitation — a court order, a statute, or a formal legal instrument. A researcher reading "restrain" in a historical legal document should look for that external authority rather than reading the word as merely descriptive of restriction in the general sense.
---
Common Confusion
"Restrain" and "enjoin" are often used interchangeably in older equity practice, but they are not identical. To enjoin carries the specific technical sense of a court directing action or inaction through an injunction. To restrain is the broader term and may encompass prohibitions that arise from statute, contract, or instrument — not only from equitable decrees. Historical sources, including Black's 2nd Ed., define a restraining order as an order "in the nature of an injunction," which signals that the two are related but distinguishable. In modern practice, a temporary restraining order (TRO) is a specific, time-limited procedural device with its own procedural rules, whereas an injunction may be preliminary or permanent. Researchers encountering either term in historical sources should not assume the modern procedural distinction applies.
---
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES
Restraining Order: A court order prohibiting a party from taking specified action, often issued ex parte and on an emergency basis pending fuller hearing. In modern civil procedure, the temporary restraining order (TRO) is the procedural vehicle. Historical usage is less precise.
Restraining Statute: A statute that cuts back or limits the reach of the common law. As Anderson's notes, a restraining statute does not abolish common-law doctrine but narrows it. This usage appears frequently in historical sources discussing the relationship between equity and common law.
Restraining Powers: Restrictions placed by the grantor of a power upon the manner or extent of its exercise. Encountered in property law and estate documents.
Restraint of Trade: A category of contract doctrine treating agreements that limit commercial competition. Whether a restraint of trade is lawful depends on its reasonableness. This is a major doctrinal area with its own extensive case law and should be researched as a distinct term.
Restraint on Alienation: A limitation imposed on the transfer of property. The law has long disfavored unreasonable restraints on alienation of real property.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The word "restrain" is a term of art that shifts meaning depending on its context within the corpus. A researcher who encounters it must determine whether the source is discussing: (1) equity and injunctive relief; (2) contract doctrine involving trade or marriage; (3) property instruments limiting transfer; (4) statutory modification of common law; or (5) personal liberty and unlawful confinement. Treating these as interchangeable will produce errors.
In historical sources, "restrain" often appears where modern practice would use "enjoin" or "issue an injunction." This matters because the procedural consequences differ, and historical sources predating the merger of law and equity courts may describe restraint as purely an equitable remedy unavailable at common law.
Restraining statutes present a particular trap: a historical source describing a statute as "restraining" is not saying the statute is invalid — it is describing the statute's function of limiting common-law operation. This is the opposite of how a modern researcher might read "restraining" if applied to a statute.
The connection to prohibition (the writ) is also important. Anderson's cross-references prohibition directly under this entry. In equity and prerogative writ practice, restraining inferior courts from exceeding jurisdiction is the function of the writ of prohibition. Researchers working on jurisdictional questions, mandamus, or certiorari should follow that thread to the encyclopedia entry noted above.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's 2nd Ed. and Anderson's largely agree on the core meaning — limitation, restriction, prohibition — but their framing differs usefully. Black's organizes its treatment around the verb's equitable application, emphasizing "to enjoin" and using "restrain" as functionally synonymous with injunctive relief. Anderson's takes a broader view, treating the word as encompassing regulatory suppression (as applied to amusements or licenses), contractual limitation (restraint of trade or marriage), and statutory abridgment of common-law rights. Both dictionaries are accurate; neither is comprehensive standing alone.
Anderson's gloss that "to restrain and suppress an amusement is to regulate or wholly suppress it, or regulate it by a license" is a useful reminder that historical legal usage of "restrain" in public-law contexts includes regulatory licensing regimes — not merely outright prohibition. A researcher reviewing historical municipal ordinances or police-power cases should keep this broader meaning in view.
Neither dictionary addresses the modern procedural distinction between a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. Researchers working on injunctive relief in any post-merger (post-Field Code, post-1938 Federal Rules) jurisdiction should consult current procedural sources rather than relying on these definitions alone.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The procedural mechanics of restraining orders vary by jurisdiction. Federal courts apply Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs TROs and preliminary injunctions with specificity. State courts operate under their own procedural rules, and the terminology — restraining order, injunction, stay — is not uniform across jurisdictions. In some states, "restraining order" has also acquired a distinct meaning in the domestic relations context, referring to protective orders in family law proceedings.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Prohibition — Restraining Inferior Courts and Tribunals from Exceeding Jurisdiction (Law Mind Remedies & Equity Encyclopedia)
---