Definition
Latin: "comes and defends." A formal phrase used in old common law pleading to signal a defendant's appearance in court and entry of defense. When a defendant appeared to answer a plaintiff's claim, the plea or return was traditionally opened with this formula — signifying both physical appearance before the court and the defendant's intention to contest the action. The phrase served as a ritualized threshold declaration before the substantive defense was stated.
The full phrase could be extended depending on the nature of the action:
- VENIT ET DEFENDIT VIM ET INJURIAM — "comes and defends the force and injury." Used in actions where force or wrong was alleged, particularly trespass.
- VENIT ET DEFENDIT OMNEM FELONIAM, ET PACEM DOMINI REGIS INFRACTAM — "comes and defends all the felony, and breach of the king's peace." Used in criminal or quasi-criminal proceedings where the defendant appeared to contest a charge of felony and breach of the king's peace.
---
Common Language
This section is omitted. Venit et defendit is pure legal Latin with no counterpart in ordinary modern or historical English usage.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term is a navigational marker for the formal pleading structure of early common law. Researchers working in pre-19th-century English records — plea rolls, Year Books, early American colonial and state court records — will encounter this phrase as a standard opening formula in defendant pleadings. Its presence signals that what follows is a formal defense, and understanding the phrase helps a researcher identify where in the plea the substantive answer begins.
The extended variants matter for subject identification. Venit et defendit vim et injuriam appears in trespass pleadings; the felony variant appears in criminal proceedings. Both signal not only the type of action but the procedural posture — the defendant has appeared and is contesting on the merits, rather than defaulting or confessing.
By the time of American legal reform movements in the mid-19th century — particularly following the Field Code of 1848 and the subsequent abolition of common law forms of pleading in many states — this phrase disappeared from practice. Researchers should not expect to find it in post-reform American sources except as historical reference or quotation. Its presence in a document is itself strong evidence of the document's vintage and jurisdictional context.
Burrill's expanded treatment, which preserves both Bracton and Shower citations alongside the base definition, is the most useful of the three source dictionaries for tracing the phrase into its specific procedural variants. Researchers who encounter a variant form should consult Burrill first before concluding they have found an anomalous usage.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
All three source dictionaries agree on the core definition: "comes and defends," the proper words of appearance and defense in an action. All three cite 1 Lord Raymond 117 as the authority — a consistent pointer that suggests this citation was the canonical common law reference for the formula.
Black's (both editions) treats the entry economically, confining it to the base phrase and a single citation. Burrill goes further, preserving the two extended variants with their own citations — Shower 443 for vim et injuriam and Bracton folio 138b for the felony variant, with an additional cross-reference to Fleta. This layering in Burrill is historically significant: it reflects an older tradition of collecting the formulaic variations rather than abstracting to a single definition, and it connects the phrase to the great institutional writers of medieval English law.
Neither Black's edition acknowledges the variants, which means a researcher relying solely on Black's would not discover that the phrase had specialized extensions depending on the nature of the proceeding. This is a gap worth noting.
No source dictionary contextualizes the phrase within the abolition of common law pleading or explains when the formula fell out of use — an omission typical of 19th-century law dictionaries, which were written when the memory of the old forms was still relatively fresh.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The phrase is native to English common law practice and was carried into early American colonial courts. Its use was effectively extinguished in American jurisdictions that adopted code pleading during the 19th century. It persisted longer in English practice, though English procedural reforms of the same era similarly displaced it.
---