Definition
Shifting is a legal term of relationship, not a freestanding concept. It describes the movement or transfer of a legal interest, obligation, or procedural burden from one person, party, or estate to another. It appears across several distinct doctrinal contexts, each with its own rules:
1. SHIFTING USE / SHIFTING EXECUTORY INTEREST. In property law, a shifting interest is a future interest in a third party that cuts short or divests a prior estate upon the occurrence of a specified condition. Unlike a springing executory interest (which springs out of the grantor), a shifting executory interest operates between two grantees — the second grantee's interest shifts away from the first when the triggering event occurs.
2. SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF. In procedure and evidence, shifting occurs when a party who initially bore the burden of proof on an issue has produced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case or defense, thereby transferring the obligation to proceed — or the risk of non-persuasion — to the opposing party. The mechanics of exactly what shifts (burden of production vs. burden of persuasion) are a persistent source of confusion in both analysis and historical sources.
3. FEE-SHIFTING. In litigation, fee-shifting describes the transfer of attorney's fees from the party who incurred them to the opposing party, either by statute, court rule, or contractual agreement. The American Rule (each party bears its own fees) treats fee-shifting as the exception; in many other jurisdictions it is the default.
4. SHIFTING INHERITANCE / USE. Historical usage, flagged by Anderson's, connects shifting to doctrines of uses and inheritance — specifically, conditions that redirect property from one line of heirs to another.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A shift or change; a shifting movement; in linguistics, the reordering of constituents around a common head.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Changing in place, position, or direction; varying; variable; fickle — as in shifting winds or shifting opinions.
The common meaning captures simple change or variability. The legal meanings are more precise: they describe a structured, rule-governed transfer of a specific legal incident (an interest, a burden, a cost obligation) from one party to another at a defined moment and for defined reasons. "Shifting" in law is not mere change — it is triggered transfer with legal consequence.
---
Common Confusion
Two distinctions matter most to researchers:
SHIFTING vs. SPRINGING (executory interests). A springing executory interest cuts short the grantor's retained interest; a shifting executory interest divests a prior grantee's interest. Both are executory interests created after the Statute of Uses (1536), but the direction of the divestiture defines which type applies. Historical sources frequently conflate them or use "shifting" loosely to cover both.
BURDEN OF PRODUCTION vs. BURDEN OF PERSUASION. When courts and treatises say the burden of proof "shifts," they do not always mean the same thing. The burden of persuasion (who loses if the jury is undecided) rarely shifts. What typically shifts is the burden of going forward with evidence — the burden of production. Black's 2nd Ed. definition is accurate on the mechanics but does not make this distinction explicit. Researchers reading older cases should be alert to courts using "shifting burden" without specifying which burden they mean.
---
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES
SHIFTING EXECUTORY INTEREST: A future interest in a third-party grantee that divests a prior grantee's estate upon a condition subsequent.
SHIFTING BURDEN OF PROOF: Transfer of the evidentiary obligation to produce or persuade, triggered by a prima facie showing by the opposing party.
FEE-SHIFTING: Reallocation of litigation costs, including attorney's fees, from one party to another by operation of statute, rule, or contract.
SHIFTING USE: The historical precursor to the shifting executory interest, describing a use that moved from one beneficiary to another upon a triggering event, enforceable in equity before the Statute of Uses and at law thereafter.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Because "shifting" appears in multiple doctrinal contexts — property, evidence, civil procedure, and remedies — corpus researchers must identify which usage is operative before tracing authority. A search returning results across all four areas will surface incompatible doctrine unless filtered by context.
PROPERTY RESEARCH: In older conveyancing materials and equity treatises, "shifting use" appears as the dominant form. Post-Statute of Uses sources begin migrating to "shifting executory interest," but the vocabulary is inconsistent well into the 19th century. American sources further complicate this by sometimes treating executory interests as a unified category without distinguishing springing from shifting. The Law Mind Property Encyclopedia entry on executory interests addresses this terminological history directly.
EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE: The burden-shifting vocabulary exploded in American case law during the 20th century, particularly in employment discrimination and administrative law contexts. Researchers working in those areas will encounter a highly developed framework (burden-shifting frameworks in employment law, for instance, are multi-step and jurisdiction-specific) that goes well beyond what any general dictionary entry can capture. Pre-20th century sources use "shifting" in the burden context but rarely with the structured analytical precision that modern doctrine demands.
FEE-SHIFTING: This usage is largely a modern American phenomenon in legal writing, though the underlying concept is old. Contractual fee-shifting clauses — "prevailing party" provisions — are now extensively litigated and require attention to both contract interpretation and judicial discretion in enforceability. The Remedies Encyclopedia entry covers this area.
INHERITANCE: Anderson's cross-reference to INHERITANCE and USE points to an older doctrinal strand — shifting conditions in wills and settlements that redirect property among classes of heirs. This usage is less common in modern primary sources but appears regularly in historical equity materials and trust instruments.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's 2nd Ed. treats shifting primarily as a descriptive modifier — "changing; varying; passing from one person to another by substitution" — and its most substantive treatment is of shifting the burden of proof, which it correctly ties to the mechanics of prima facie case-making. The definition is functionally accurate but thin: it does not address the property law sense at all, and it does not distinguish burden of production from burden of persuasion, a gap that matters considerably in research.
Anderson's Dictionary offers no independent definition, redirecting readers to INHERITANCE and USE. This is characteristic of Anderson's treatment of cross-doctrinal modifier terms; it signals that the operative doctrine lives elsewhere in the source.
Neither historical source addresses fee-shifting as a standalone concept, which is consistent with its emergence as a distinct legal term of art in American practice primarily in the late 20th century. Researchers should not expect historical dictionaries to anchor fee-shifting research; statutory and case law sources are the necessary starting point.
Both sources agree on the core idea: shifting denotes transfer of a legal interest or obligation triggered by an event or showing. Where they diverge is in emphasis — Black's gravitates toward procedure, Anderson's toward property and equity.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Fee-shifting varies significantly across jurisdictions. English practice (the "English Rule") defaults to loser-pays; American federal practice defaults to each party bearing its own fees absent statutory authorization or contractual provision. State court practice varies. Researching fee-shifting requires identifying the governing rule before analyzing specific authorities.
---