Definition
An archaic Law French term denoting distresses that are forbidden to be replevied — that is, a category of distraint in which the distraining party lawfully refuses to return seized cattle or goods to their owner even upon the owner's attempt to obtain replevin. The term captures both the act of withholding and the legal justification for that withholding: certain distresses were recognized at common law as not subject to replevy, meaning the owner's ordinary remedy of replevin was unavailable.
Why It Matters in Research
Veies is a narrow, archaic term unlikely to appear outside of historical common law materials on distress and replevin. Researchers encountering it in older English legal manuscripts, Year Books, or treatises on property and distraint should understand it as a technical classification within the law of distress — not a standalone cause of action or remedy, but a qualifier on the replevin right. The term signals that not all distresses were equal: some categories were absolute in the sense that the distrainor could resist replevin, and veies marks those categories.
The practical research trap here is mistaking veies for a general term about distress when it is specifically about the denial of replevin. A researcher tracing the history of replevin's scope — particularly its limitations — should treat veies as evidence that early common law recognized a class of irrepleviable distresses, a concept that evolved considerably as replevin expanded and statutory reforms gradually curtailed arbitrary distraint.
Veies will not appear in American case law or statutory material in any meaningful way. Its relevance is confined to English common law history and the foundational texts on distraint. Researchers using Law Mind for historical property law, feudal land tenure, or the evolution of replevin as a remedy will encounter it only in glossaries, dictionaries, and period treatises.
Historical Dictionary Support
Both editions of Black's Law Dictionary reproduce the same one-sentence definition, attributing it to Kelham's dictionary of Norman and Old French legal terms — a standard reference for Law French vocabulary in English legal history. The consistency across editions reflects the term's purely historical status: no new case law or doctrinal development required updating the entry. Black's neither expands nor qualifies the definition, suggesting the editors treated veies as a fixed historical artifact rather than a living term.
What the historical dictionaries do not supply is context for which distresses qualified as veies — that is, what made a distraint irrepleviable under early common law. That question requires reference beyond the dictionary literature to treatises on distress and replevin, such as those found in Fitzherbert or later Blackstone's treatment of the subject, where categories of distress damage feasant and related doctrines are elaborated.
Jurisdictional Note
Veies is exclusively an English common law term. It has no recognized equivalent in American, Scottish, or other common law jurisdictions, and no statutory basis anywhere in current law. Its relevance is historical and confined to English legal sources predating the abolition or reform of formal distraint procedures.