Definition
In legal practice, to speak means to argue or address the court orally. The term appears in older procedural contexts where a party was directed — or given leave — to present oral argument before the bench. The instruction "the case was ordered to be spoke to again" reflects a formal direction that the matter be re-argued or reconsidered through oral presentation.
This is a narrow procedural term of art, not a substantive legal concept. Its significance is almost entirely historical, tied to the forms of common law practice in English and early American courts.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A speakeasy; a low-class bar.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): To utter words or articulate sounds, as human beings do; to express thoughts by words; to express opinions; to converse.
The ordinary meaning of "speak" — verbal communication generally — overlaps with the legal term only superficially. In practice, the legal use is narrower and procedurally specific: it denotes formal oral argument before a tribunal, not mere talking. A researcher encountering "speak" in older reports should treat it as a term of art meaning to argue a matter before the court, not as a generic reference to speech or conversation.
---
Common Confusion
SPEAK (procedural) vs. SPEECH (constitutional): Do not conflate this procedural term with the constitutional law concept of "speech" under the First Amendment. The procedural use of "speak" refers to the act of arguing before a court; First Amendment "speech" is a protected category of expressive conduct. A researcher who encounters "speak" in old English practice reports and reads constitutional significance into it will be misreading the source entirely.
SPEAK vs. SPEAKING WITH: Black's Law Dictionary distinguishes SPEAK from the related term SPEAKING WITH, which referred to the practice of obtaining leave to address the court informally or to confer regarding the management of a case. See also IMPARLANCE, which involves a request for time to confer before pleading.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working with English case reports — particularly those printed in the Modern Reports series (Mod.) — will encounter "spoke to" or "spoken to" as procedural shorthand for oral argument or reconsideration directed by the court. The phrase signals a procedural event, not a substantive ruling. Misreading it as a mere conversational reference will cause researchers to misunderstand the procedural posture of a reported case.
The shift away from this usage matters for temporal navigation. By the time American case law consolidated in the nineteenth century, "speak" had largely receded from procedural vocabulary. Researchers working across the transition from English common law practice to American procedure should be alert to the term appearing in borrowed or translated English authorities but largely absent from domestic American sources of the same period.
The Wiktionary definition ("speakeasy") reflects twentieth-century slang with no bearing on legal research. Do not import it into a legal source reading.
For researchers interested in the constitutional dimension of speech — compelled speech, the right to silence, or expressive conduct — this procedural entry is not the starting point. Navigate instead to the encyclopedia entry noted above.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Both editions of Black's Law Dictionary are in agreement: "speak" in practice means to argue, and both editions cite the same source (the Modern Reports, with the second edition correcting the citation to "10 Mod. 107"). The definition is brief and illustrative in both, suggesting that even at the time of Black's compilation, the term was already largely archaic and needed exemplification rather than extended treatment.
Neither edition explores the constitutional or rhetorical dimensions of speech, which is appropriate given the term's strictly procedural meaning in this context. Neither edition links "speak" to First Amendment discourse — that connection is a creature of constitutional development well after Black's first editions were compiled.
What the historical dictionaries do not address: the gradual displacement of this procedural vocabulary by more formal terms such as "oral argument," "address the court," or "argument of counsel." The silence is itself informative — by the time American legal dictionaries were maturing, the usage had already narrowed to historical citation rather than live practice.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
"Compelled Speech — The Right Not to Speak," The Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia (constitutional_95). Note: this encyclopedia entry addresses the constitutional doctrine governing compelled speech and the right to silence under the First Amendment — a fundamentally different body of law from the procedural term defined here. The connection is terminological, not doctrinal. Researchers should treat the two as distinct inquiries.
---