What Latin phrases should law students learn -- perhaps by way of my mentioning them in class (I do a little language riddle in class for a couple of minutes once a week)? I'm not looking for phrases that are legal terms of art that they'll learn in the relevant class, such as res judicata, habeas corpus, and the like.
Rather, I have in mind things like e.g., i.e., viz., prima facie, sui generis, inter alia, in camera, et al., and such -- common phrases that arise in many areas of the law, yet ones that many incoming law students may not know, and that they won't learn in any of their other classes. Students should understand these phrases, and know how to use them right (though in some situations the best solution is not to use them at all; for instance, better say "among other things" than "inter alia").
Please pass along your suggestions in the comments. Again, please focus on phrases that are common enough in the law to be worth mentioning, but that are likely not to be known to nonlawyers (or, as with e.g. and i.e., likely to be confused by nonlawyers).
post hoc ergo propter hoc (or just ergo)
a fortiari
a priori
a fortiori
sub silencio
N.B.
Ok, so it is not exactly what you are looking for, but you have to admit that it is funny.
guardian ad litem
ipso facto
arguendo
ex post
ex ante
dubitante
nunc pro tunc
alter ego
de minimis
ex ante / ex post
"I don't know what that means. The judge isn't going to know what that means."
sub silentio
inter se
nunc pro tunc
My pet peeve is when it appears as "et. al."
Italia est paeninsula.
Illegitimi non carborundum.
No, for that we have the bureaucracy.
lacuna/lacunae
en banc
(I've been startled at how many people don't know that one, even comparatively late in their law school careers.)
a new one worked out with some friends, refluat stercus (making sh*t roll uphill).
Best,
Ben
jus cogens
But, if you are collecting phrases, what about in pectore.
Wouldn't it be "et alia," assuming that the phrase generally intends the plural? Also, is your problem with the abbreviation the incorrect period after "et" or shortening "al."? I concur if you mean the period, but I think "et al." is sufficiently well-established that there's nothing wrong with using it-- much like "etc."
pro hac vice
pro per
ipse dixit
in re
ex rel
I also agree on "instant." That confused the hell out of me as a 1L. Like "Instant case! Just add water!"
Mike S,
Most, if not all, of the phrases do have English equivalents, but they are nevertheless used quite often in judicial opinions and it is therefore quite helpful for lawyers to know them.
Actually, for years I have been an advocate of replacing inter alia with "among other things" or some similar English equivalent. I think that it improves your writing to avoid latin phrases that do not bring anything substantial to the table. And I suspect that your partners were not necessarily speaking the truth when they said that, just stating a common preference for plain language in briefing. My own mentors often said things like "Great argument, but the judge is not going to understand it unless you spell it out in words of three syllables or less."
The argument for retaining words like "res judicata" is that it is not always clear that someone means exactly the same thing when they say, e.g., "preclusion." Simpler to retain the language in the casebooks. And some latin phrases convey things that it is difficult to convey in plain English, e.g., "dictum." But "inter alia" is just fancy talk, and usually just throat clearing anyway.
I've usually seen that written with an "enim" somewhere..? (I've also seen varying word orders, but then, word order isn't that important in Latin anyway.)
I think I posted this last time Latin came up, but: Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
And finally, to be serious, please teach the difference between "i.e." and "e.g.". Mixing those two is one of my pet peeves.
Ad hoc
ad astra per aspera
de gustibus non est disputandum
and everybody's fave: carpe diem
Bittern: whoa, you brought me back to 9th grade in 2 seconds flat!
That which is said in Latin seems profound.
Might be useful to check it out, though it's more comprehensive than just the general phrases.
de novo
dictum
ex officio
ex parte
id.
sine die
sua sponte
As Ray Bones put it, "E.g., i.e., fuck you!"
Et cetera to show that it isn't pronounced like "eck setera."
sui generis
Three years of law school and three years of practice and I still don't know when the heck to use this.
I like malum prohibitum vs malum in se because they make the libertarian point that violating legislative and administrative laws is not a "genuine wrong".
Also, teach the difference between pro se and pro. per. ("pro se" litigant lacks a lawyer; whereas appearing "in pro[pria] per[sona]" the litigant is physically present in court, rather than having his lawyer appear for him).
ad testificandum
*The difference between "inter alia" and "inter alios"
*"pars pro toto"
*"Non erit alia lex Romae, alia Athenis; alia nunc, alia posthac; sed et apud omnes gentes, et omni tempore una eademque lex obtinebit."
I hope you - and s/he - thus always wrote "t.i." and "f.e." instead of "i.e." and "e.g." then. ;)
Also, "Omnia Gallia in tres partes divisa est," "alea jacta est," and "veni, vidi, vici." All attributed to Julius Cæsar.
Sorted.
nisi prius
in pari materia
in rem
res
"The electorate's effort at legislating should neither be scrutinized nor delayed by attacks that do not affect the petition's compliance with some sine qua non submission requirement."
(If you had kept your mouth shut we might have thought you were clever)
QED - Quod Erat Demonstratum
supra
infra
Very much so. I remember very distinctly that when I first started reading caselaw, which is a hazing ritual in and of itself, that word littered everywhere was one of the things that puzzled me right out of the gate. You figure it out pretty quickly, of course, but it might ease the culture shock a little.
I must second the nomination of "qua" as well, in light of this. I really do despise self-righteous prigs (presumably including FantasiaWHT's former boss) who take it upon themselves to purge Latin phrases from usage.
At least enough to know not to buy the tickets to see the Cave at emptor.
e pluribus unum - from many, one
a fortiori
a posteriori
ceteris paribus
coram nobis
ejusdem generis
in pari delicto
nisi prius
nunc pro tunc
pendente lite
quo warranto
res gestae
I will not sue sponte, as I have no dispute with him ;)
I think you mean sua sponte.
res ipsa loquitor?
As the Professor noted, he was not looking for legal terms of art.
Finally, let me register my disagreement with the Professor on the use of the term "inter alia" -- I find it to be a useful term to use sometimes in lieu of "among other things."
I think someone posted about this on this blog, but I still am confused by the fact that some courts use "in banc" and I understand that there are some judges who have wasted quite a bit of paper arguing over which term is correct. For years, the Federal Circuit sat "in banc" but now it sits "en banc."
PATER NOSTER, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.
AVE MARIA, gratia plena, Dominus tecum. Benedicta tu in mulieribus, et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Iesus. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc, et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen.
GLORIA PATRI, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
Yeah. Right. Very confusing. I don't see how anyone without benefit of legal training could possibly grasp the difference.
Get away from the law school for a while, EV. It'll do you a world of good.
The phrase should play no role in legal discourse. See U.S. Const., amend. I. Furthermore, if one adopts Justice Scalia's view of the Establishment Clause, it permits government speech re religion so long as the religion is monotheistic. Thus, even under his view, the government should not be endorsing a view that maintains that there are three gods.
And for the record, QED stands for quod erat demonstrandum (not "demonstratum"). It's the gerundive (a/k/a the future passive particple), as in Cato the Elder's oft-truncated remark, "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse."
The two phrases in question are "et alius" and "eta alia"; the former abbreviated "et al.", the latter "et. al." - I no longer recall the difference between the two, but I was compelled by something much like Janice's pet peeve to look up the abbreviation. I was surprised to find that both "et al." and "et. al." were correct, meaning subtly different things.
I am sure someone with much better Latin than I can clarify the difference.
But my favorite Latinism, which is actually quite useful.
Does viz. come between i.e. and e.g. ? (Which is to say, it is an example, but perhaps because it is of a one-of-a-kind origin, it is the only example.)
Kudos to any language that has a word for one-and-a-half.
cf. and q.v. are useful.
nolle prosequi
cui bono
Carthago delenda est
Ars gratia artis (roar)
"Ne cede malis" - Yield not to evil - is the motto of the Bronx. "Ask about our Latin motto contest"
1. Are there any concepts for which there is NOT an accurate English expression and Latin must be used?
2. Is there any reason other than 1 for using a Latin term?
3. What Latin terms do lawyers need to know because others will use them (often improperly)?
I didn't intend for the dramatic pause, but "qua" is my favorite, useful, Latinism.
Here's a random one: brutum fulmen
Felicity of expression is not served by linguistic parsimony.
"Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse" must have some utility at the bar.
Quasi--this means "as if." It's important because its often used.
On the subject of res ipsa loquitur, I like this extension of the doctrine: "Res ipsa loquitur, sed quid in infernos dicet."
--PtM
To the poster who suggested that law students just use the English equivalent, it isn't that easy. Many, if not most, of these terms have developed very specific meanings over the centuries, and the Latin comes with the judical gloss, while the English translation doesn't. PaulD makes that point for res judicata, but it also applies to many, if not most, of the Latin here.
It's a form you send to the judge and opposing counsel telling them you've set a motion hearing in the case (only in civil practice).
But why not include:
Pro Bono Publico
Cum tacent, clamant (Cicero - By remaining silent, they cry out.)
Nulla regula sine exceptione (there is no rule without exception)
Ipsa scientia potestas est. (Knowledge itself is power)
And my favorite: In vino veritas (There is truth in wine.)
Dulce et decorum pro patria moris (Horace, quoted as the bitter lie by Wilfred Owen.)
*a fortiori (not fortiari)
*expressio unius est exclusio alterius (not unis)
*in pari materia (not in pari matria)
Italia non est insula (not islanda)
res ipsa loquitur (not loquitor)
*sua sponte (not sue sponte, which would mean 'voluntarily by a pig')
*sub silentio (not sub silencio, unless it's Mediaeval Latin)
urbi et orbi (not ad urbi et orbi)
I may have missed one or two.
More on et al. in a moment -- it's complicated.
Oh, I'm a Latin teacher, not a lawyer, if that makes a difference.
http://www.drweevil.org
Extra territorium jus dicenti impune non paretur.
obiter dictum/dicta
prima facie
(if you don't swing, don't ring)
It's probably safer to stick to the abbreviated form. If the others are objects, then the correct forms are et alios for men or mixed-gender groups, et alias for a group consisting entirely of women, and et alia for things. But if they're subjects, e.g. "Smith, Jones, et al. were indicted for perjury", then the forms would be et alii, et aliae, and et alia respectively. If you make them possessives ("the case of Smith, Jones, et al."), or indirect objects ("the deed was given to Smith, Jones, et al."), there are yet other endings in Latin. If you're wondering, that's aliorum, aliarum, and aliorum respectively for possessives, aliis for all genders of indirect object. These look very awkward to me, so I would definitely use the abbreviated "al.".
There are yet other forms for singulars, but I don't suppose "Smith, Jones, et al." ever means Smith, Jones, and one other person.
Re "inter alia" - useful how? Not being argumentative, just curious.
Anyway, it's interesting how completely the thread has refused to be constrained by Eugene's distinction between phrases with a tie to a specific legal doctrine that students learn as such ("res ipsa loquitor" and, I would argue, the maxims) and phrases with general usage ("sub judice").
I vote for "res."
My views on this subject are shared by the great Frank Easterbrook, who doesn't even use the word "versus." He always says "against." Like, "Roe against Wade."
Check out Scalia's dissent in Youngblood v. West Virginia to learn about "Verb. Sap." which equals "Verbum Sapienti," meaning "a word to the wise is enough."
Appears to be a phrase not being taught anywhere.
Funny, I was thinking about saying that.
Would anyone get it if I said "If they should know most of these kal v'chomer they should know a fortiori?"
I should have know that the ponderous phrase "the instant case" is derived from Latin. No lawyer should be taught that phrase, but instead should use "this case."
dgh5, I do not avoid Latin in prayer although I prefer the novus ordum.
ad hominem
Also, (from Coke's maxims, I believe) "Lex non favit delicatorum votis"
r gould-saltman
I get it. (kal v'Ho-mer is the Talmudic equivalent of a fortiori)
Do you actually practice law and litigate? Do you read cases? If the answer to either question is yes, I am shocked by your statement. For better or worse, a lot of cases use a lot of these Latin terms. You need to understand them even if you think that they should not be used.
Less wordy and often flows better in a brief. Does not require commas. It depends on the phrase and the paragraph.
Those who can do, those who can't teach.
I have found this to be quite true (with some obvious exceptions) in law. Most of the professors I knew in law school impressed me as very intelligent people, but it is clear that they didn't know the first thing about practicing law. The use of Latin phrases when appropriate is not in any way a sign of professional incompetence. And I guarantee that I could and would outlawyer the hell out of the commenter, especially in a trial court.
Not a latin phrase, but one that far too few lawyers and judges are familiar with -- ESCHEW OBFUSCATION
citius, altius, fortius
There was ayoung man called X
Who had very small organs of sex
When charged with exposure
He replied with composure
De minimis non curat lex
At a trial in Ireland, an elderly judge had apparently taken a shine to a young defendant and was shamelessly coaching the defendant's lawyer -- to the lawyer's intense frustration. At one point in the proceeding, the judge peered over his glasses and inquired of the lawyer, "Has your client ever heard of the defense "volenti non fit injuria"? To which the lawyer replied: "In the part of Ireland my client comes from, my Lord, they speak of little else."
* ex visceribus verborum
* in terrorem
mens rea
And while it isn't latin, they should know the etymology of voir dire (as well as regional pronunciations.)
Nux Vomicus (until you are sick of it)
pcta sunt servanda - contract must be performed
una lex, una iustitia omnibus - one law, one justice for all
yeah, and this one, too: o, tempus, o, mores!
"ad hominum" for ad hominem
"quod erat demonstratum" for quod erat demonstrandum
"de minimus" for de minimis
Nothing makes you look like more of a fool than attempting to sound smart by using latin, then misspelling it.
also, my personal favorite, which I don't think has been mentioned yet ... in flagrante delicto!
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Ita erat quando hic adveni. (It was like that when I got here.)
Haec olim meminisse iuabit. (Someday these things will be pleasing to remember.)
The problem with seeing Latin phrases in print is one thing (as noted, misspellings being prevalent), but to hear someone who has never studied Latin mouthing these phrases can only bring back memories of Sid Caesar doing his gibberish in a pitch perfect foreign accent. Or “Calhoun The Lawyer” on the Amos &Andy show.
See "Dog-Latin" in Brewers &"LAW LATIN" (caps in original) in "A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage”.
You should also do a piece on Law French, some of which has been alluded to in this thread.
You might also do one on “initialese” in legal documents, which can sometimes drive clients nuts, but which usage is not restricted to lawyers and which has now blossomed forth on the ‘net, BTW.
Neither Law School Nor the Practice of Law Should Be a Latin Mass
Best wishes,
Jim Chen
(I'm not some guy you got out of the 'hood, so I don't know: do they still call one's entourage one's posse, or is that like so last week?)
Strongly seconded; learning it in the Latin may help them understand how old and difficult the underlying problem is. Given the duration of some cases, ad nauseam might also be appropriate. It might also be nice if lawyers could grasp "in medio stat virtus", but I(AmNotALawyer) may be hoping for too much with that one.
Lawyers generally master "nihil sine lucre" pretty quickly, so I think it can safely be omitted. =)
There are also many old medical phrases in Latin, although they, too, all escape me.
fait accompli (accomplished fact)
faux pas (false step)
deja vu (already seen)
carte blanche (blank card)
idiot-savant (feeble-minded wise man)
lantern rouge (red lantern -- the red light at the end of a train, or the bottom surviving rider in general classification in the Tour de France)
Black's Law Dictionary has a good collection of Latin expressions, many of them long.
A friend of mine, who is a lawyer, used the Latin phrase "bona contencion" believing it meant "the goods in contention" or more generally "the subject matter of the dispute". It turns out that the phase she had heard, misunderstood, and mispronounced for many years was "bone of contention".
et al. = et alii ("and the others") "eta alia" is not Latin and is meaningless. et. al. Can also mean et alibi - "and elsewhere"
e.g. = exempli gratia ("for the sake of example")
Second, a further explanation:
mutatis mutandis means "having changed those things that have to be changed".
Third, my list:
res ipsa loquitur
obiter dicta/dictum
res judicata
de minimis (...non curat lex)
(in) arguendo
ex abundantia cautela
reductio ad absurdum
ab initio
actus reus
mens rea
alibi(in its proper meaning of "elsewhere" rather than the more common usage to mean any excuse)
amicus curiae
audi alteram partem
ex parte/inter partes
...more to follow
The only purely French law terms I can recall are Oyez = Hear ye, and cy pres = nearby.
Any time you use a Latin term, you should ask yourself if you could make do succinctly with English. If not, use Latin. Ignore the academic pedants (the fusty Latin scholars who know every obscure term and insist on actually using them all, and the strident Tom Tancredo English-only-always types).
This may be a minor gripe, but the list that's appearing on this thread isn't very useful to a law student like me, because most of the Latin phrases aren't defined. If I have to look up each one individually, well . . . why not just wait until I actually encounter it in practice? I can't justify the time expenditure of looking up a phrase to see if I should bother committing it to memory.
Plus, if people define the Latin terms they post, there is a chance that someone will make a mistake, and then other people can point out their mistake, which is always good fun.
And while it is in more general use than just law, I suppose that ibidem counts or is another term used for that purpose? Also, technically, versus counts.
forum non conveniens
What would the Latin be for:
Legislation unencumbered by the thought process
I want to propose this as a new official motto for Congress.
You can send the answer directly to my email. No need to derail this thread further.
Mens sana in corpore sano
meaning "a sound mind in a sound body". (I hope I got the genders right.)
In propria persona (Not the same as "in proper person")
Cessante ratione legis cessat et ipse lex
De minimis non curat senex
I would also like to suggest my favorite writ that is listed in Blackstone's Commentaries, de idiota inquirendo.
I’m sure you know, but for the record as pompous lawyers say:
“et al” is an abbreviation of
“et aliae” (and other women), &
“et alia ” (and other things
as well as of your
“et alii” (and other men).
This triple-threat abbreviation avoids what’s called the “orshe” stuff (i.e., he or she in documents, in this case “andshe”). As you probably also know, to avoid sounding déclassé, one should be aware that the “al” is not pronounced as if it were short for the name Albert; it is pronounced “ahl”
Jim Chen
So you never heard of Henri IV?
Spragin
Bone a contention.
Sid Caesar would approve of your story; also Chico Marx, &possibly the Marlon Brando of Waterfront!
Now let me add a story about de profundis (out of the depths; from Psalm 130). A lawschool classmate of mine was a control freak, a/k/a/, bully. For some reason he decided that I was too serious or something &started calling me “de profundis”, apparently transliterating it from the Latin to “profound”, which he meant to use in a mocking sense. I explained to him that he was confused as to the meaning of the phrase, but he was apparently of the belief that a name hung on someone would stick if the name caller kept repeating it, probably a good working hypothesis. And so no one would suggest that he stop no matter how I corrected him. A bone of contention as your lawyer would say. So I started calling him “de minimis”, the meaning of which was known to all fellow lawschool students, profound or profane. He stopped immediately.
Colorado Steve
Your proclamation of this common phrase is sound Latin &sound English.
Here is one whose meaning has changed --
ignoramus
Now means an utterly ignorant person -- from an ignorant lawyer in Ignoramus (1615), a play by George Ruggle. According to Webster's New World Dictionary: In Latin, it literally means "we take no notice" (a legal term formerly written on a bill of indictment by a grand jury that finds it to be not a true bill). According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, means "we are ignorant of" in Latin.
What about this is so difficult to understand?? Then there are the numbers who claim to be "surprised" when a specific term is not mentioned (when it is - for example, in the blog post itself). Then there are those who don't read the preceding comments before repeating something that has already been mentioned. I hope most of you aren't lawyers. It would be alarming otherwise.
I think I'll go slit my wrists . . .
To admit some professional incompetence of my own, I was in practice for, well, longer than a month or two, before I knew that in limine, as in "Motion in Limine" did NOT mean "to limit". Heh.
And how can law students deal with their professors without knowing sic semper tyrannis?
connotation not denotation. et al. means and others while inter al. means among others. Implied (but not explicit) in et al. is that the precedant/s is/are part of a group and that the precedant/s is/are the most significant part/s of the group. Implied (but not explicit) in inter alia is the connotation that the precdant/s is/are just members of a group and should not be taken significant parts of the group merely because they are named. While defintionally the terms may be used interchangably (and have been), it is better usage to pay attention to the connotations.
Per se should be on the list.
Got me my first job - the professor came across it in a case, mentioned he did not know what it was. Neither did I, but I was the only one who came back the next class with the answer.
One year later, that professor (who was a practicing attorney and only taught that one class) remembered me when I applied at his firm.
- Iudex non calculat (The judge doesn't do the math)
- Iura novit curia (The court knows the laws)