Writ \Writ\, archaic imp. & p. p. of Write. --Dryden. [1913
Webster]
Writ \Writ\, n. [AS. writ, gewrit. See Write.] [1913 Webster]
That which is written; writing; scripture; --
applied especially to the Scriptures, or the books of the Old and
New testaments; as, sacred writ. "Though in Holy Writ not named."
--Milton. [1913 Webster] Then to his hands that writ he did betake,
Which he disclosing read, thus as the paper spake. --Spenser. [1913
Webster] Babylon, so much spoken of in Holy Writ. --Knolles. [1913
Webster]
(Law) An instrument in writing, under seal, in an
epistolary form, issued from the proper authority, commanding the
performance or nonperformance of some act by the person to whom it
is directed; as, a writ of entry, of error, of execution, of
injunction, of mandamus, of return, of summons, and the like. [1913
Webster] Note: Writs are usually witnessed, or tested, in the name
of the chief justice or principal judge of the court out of which
they are issued; and those directed to a sheriff, or other
ministerial officer, require him to return them on a day specified.
In former English law and practice, writs in civil cases were
either original or judicial; the former were issued out of the
Court of Chancery, under the great seal, for the summoning of a
defendant to appear, and were granted before the suit began and in
order to begin the same; the latter were issued out of the court
where the original was returned, after the suit was begun and
during the pendency of it. Tomlins. Brande. Encyc. Brit. The term
writ is supposed by Mr. Reeves to have been derived from the fact
of these formulae having always been expressed in writing, being,
in this respect, distinguished from the other proceedings in the
ancient action, which were conducted orally. [1913 Webster]
Writ
of account, Writ of
capias, etc. See under Account, Capias, etc. Service
of a writ. See under Service. [1913 Webster]
Write \Write\, v. t. [imp. Wrote; p. p. Written; Archaic imp. & p.
p. Writ; p. pr. & vb.
n. Writing.] [OE.
writen, AS. wr[imac]tan; originally, to scratch, to score; akin to
OS. wr[imac]tan to write, to tear, to wound, D. rijten to tear, to
rend, G. reissen, OHG. r[imac]zan, Icel. r[imac]ta to write, Goth.
writs a stroke, dash, letter. Cf. Race tribe, lineage.] [1913
Webster]
To set down, as legible characters; to form the
conveyance of meaning; to inscribe on any material by a suitable
instrument; as, to write the characters called letters; to write
figures. [1913 Webster]
To set down for reading; to express in legible or
intelligible characters; to inscribe; as, to write a deed; to write
a bill of divorcement; hence, specifically, to set down in an
epistle; to communicate by letter. [1913 Webster] Last night she
enjoined me to write some lines to one she loves. --Shak. [1913
Webster] I chose to write the thing I durst not speak To her I
loved. --Prior. [1913 Webster]
Hence, to compose or produce, as an author. [1913
Webster] I purpose to write the history of England from the
accession of King James the Second down to a time within the memory
of men still living. --Macaulay. [1913 Webster]
To impress durably; to imprint; to engrave; as,
truth written on the heart. [1913 Webster]
To make known by writing; to record; to prove by
one's own written testimony; -- often used reflexively. [1913
Webster] He who writes himself by his own inscription is like an
ill painter, who, by writing on a shapeless picture which he hath
drawn, is fain to tell passengers what shape it is, which else no
man could imagine. --Milton. [1913 Webster] To write
to, to communicate by a written document to. Written
laws, laws deriving their force from express legislative
enactment, as contradistinguished from unwritten, or common, law.
See the Note under Law, and
Common
law, under Common, a.
[1913 Webster]
Word Net
writ n : (law) a legal document issued by a court or judicial officer [syn: judicial writ]Moby Thesaurus
bench warrant, blank, capias, caveat, chirograph, death warrant, docket, document, dossier, fieri facias, file, form, habere facias possessionem, holograph, injunction, instrument, interdict, legal document, legal instrument, legal paper, mandamus, mandate, mandatory injunction, mittimus, nisi prius, notice, notification, official document, paper, papers, parchment, personal file, precept, process, prohibitory injunction, roll, scrip, script, scroll, search warrant, subpoena, summons, warrant, warrant of arrest, warrant of attorney, writingEnglish
Etymology
Old EnglishPronunciation
-
- Rhymes: -ɪt
Translations
Verb
writDerived terms
Old English
Noun
writ n (used in the form ġewrit)- writ
In law, a
writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrative
or judicial jurisdiction. In modern
usage, this public body is normally a court. Warrants,
prerogative
writs, and subpoenas are types of writs,
but there are many others.
English law
History
In origin a writ was a letter, or command, from
the King, or from some person exercising franchise jurisdiction.
Early writs were usually written in Latin and royal writs were
sealed with the
Great Seal. At a very early stage in the English common law, a
writ became necessary, in most cases, to have a case heard in one
of the Royal Courts, such as the King's Bench
or
Common Pleas. Some franchise courts, especially in the Counties
Palatine, had their own system of writs that often reflected or
anticipated the common law writs. The writ would act as a command
that the case be brought before the court issuing the writ, or it
might command some other act on the part of the recipient.
Where a plaintiff wished to have a
case heard by a local court, or by an Eyre
if one happened to be visiting the County, there would be no need
to obtain a writ. Actions in local courts could usually be started
by an informal complaint, which may not necessarily need to be
written down.
However if a plaintiff wished to avail themselves
of Royal -- and by implication superior -- justice in one of the
King's courts, then they would need a writ, a command of the King,
to enable them to do this. Initially for common law,
recourse to the King's courts was unusual, and something for which
a plaintiff would have to pay.
For Royal Courts, the writ would usually have
been purchased from the Chancery,
although the court of the Exchequer,
being in essence another government department, was able to issue
its own writs.
While originally writs were exceptional, or at
least non-routine devices, Maitland
suggests that by the time of Henry
II, the use of writs had become a regular part of the system of
royal justice in England.
At first, new writs could be drafted to fit new
situations, although in practice the clerks of the Chancery would
re-use old forms, and there were many books which were collections
of forms of writ, much as in modern times lawyers frequently use
fixed precedents or boilerplate, rather than re-inventing the
wording of a legal document each time they wish to create
one.
The problem with this approach was that the
ability to create new writs amounted to the ability to create new
forms of action. A plaintiff's rights (and by implication those of
a defendant) would be defined by the writs available to them: the
ability to create new writs was close to the ability to create new
rights, a form of legislation.
There was increasing opposition to the creation
of new writs by the Chancery. For example, in 1256, a court was
asked to quash a writ as "novel, unheard of, and against reason"
(Abbot of Lilleshall v Harcourt (1256) 96 SS xxix 44).
This resulted in the Provisions
of Oxford 1258, which prohibited the creation of new forms of
writ without the sanction of the King's council. New writs were
created after that time, but only by the express sanction of
Parliament and the forms of writ remained essentially static. Each
writ defining a particular form of
action.
With the abolition of the Forms of Action in
1832 and
1833, there no
longer needed to be a variety of writs, and one uniform of writ
came to be used. After 1852, the need to state the name of the form
of action was also abolished. In 1875, the form of writ was altered
so that it conformed more to the subpoena that had been in use
in the Chancery. A writ was a summons from the Crown, to the
parties in the action, with on its back the substance of the action
set out, together with a 'prayer', which requested a remedy from
the court (for example damages).
In 1980, the need for writs to be written in the
name of the Crown was ended, from that date a writ simply required
the parties to appear.
Writs applied to claims that were to be issued in
one of the courts that eventually formed a part of the
High Court of Justice. The procedure in a County
Court, which was a creature of statute, was to issue a
'summons'.
In 1999 the Woolf
reforms unified most of the procedure of the Supreme Court and
the County Court in civil matters. Most actions could be begun by
the completion of a 'Claim Form'. The term 'writ' has now largely
passed into disuse in English law.
Dropping the writ
In some Westminster, and some other parliamentary systems, the phrase 'dropping the writ' refers to the dissolution of government and the beginning of an election campaign to form a new House. This phrase derives from the fact that in order to hold an election in a parliamentary system the government must issue a writ of election.United States law
Early law of the United States inherited the traditional English writ system, in the sense of a rigid set of forms of relief that the law courts were authorized to grant. The All Writs Act () authorizes United States federal courts to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law." However, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted in 1938 to govern civil procedure in the United States district courts, provide that there is only one form of action in civil cases, and explicitly abolish certain writs by name. Relief formerly available by a writ is now normally available by a lawsuit (civil action) or a motion in a pending civil action. Nonetheless, a few writs have escaped abolition and remain in current use in the U.S. federal courts:- The writ of habeas corpus, usually used to test the legality of a prisoner's detention, has expressly been preserved. In the United States federal courts, the writ is most often used to review the constitutionality of criminal convictions rendered by state courts.
- By statute, the Supreme Court of the United States uses the writ of certiorari to review cases from the United States courts of appeals or from the state courts.
- In extraordinary circumstances, the United States court of appeals can use the common-law writ of prohibition under the All Writs Act to control proceedings in the district courts.
- Some courts have held that in rare circumstances in a federal criminal case, a United States district court may use the common-law writ of error coram nobis under the All Writs Act to set aside a conviction when no other remedy is available.
- The United States district courts normally follow state-court practice with respect to certain provisional remedies and procedures for enforcement of civil judgments, which may include writs of attachment and execution, among others.
The situation in the courts of the various
U.S.
states varies from state to state but is often similar to that
in the federal courts. Some states continue to use writ procedures,
such as quo
warranto, that have been abolished as a procedural matter in
federal courts.
In an attempt to purge Latin from the
language of the law, California
law has for many years used the term writ of mandate in place
of writ of mandamus, and writ of review in place of writ of
certiorari. Early efforts to replace writ of habeas corpus with
writ of have the body never caught on.
Other writs you may see:
- Writ of Bodily Attachment: A writ commanding law enforcement to physically bring in a person in contempt of court. Evidently, you cannot get out of this writ just by paying the fine, the court can hold you up to 48 hours to meet with the person issuing the writ directly.
Prerogative writs
The "prerogative" writs are a subset of the class of writs, those that are to be heard ahead of any other cases on a court's docket except other such writs. The most common of the other such prerogative writs are habeas corpus, quo warranto, prohibito, mandamus, procedendo, and certiorari.The due process for petitions for such writs is
not simply civil or criminal, because they incorporate the
presumption of nonauthority, so that the official who is the
respondent has the burden to prove his authority to do or not do
something, failing which the court has no discretion but to decide
for the petitioner, who may be any person, not just an interested
party. In this they differ from a motion in a civil process in
which the burden of proof is on the movant, and in which there can
be an issue of standing.
Indian law
Under Indian Legal System jurisdiction to issue 'prerogative writs' is given to Supreme Court and High Courts of Judicature of all Indian states. Law relating to the writ jurisdiction is provided in the Constitution of India. Supreme Court of India, which is the apex court in the country, can issue writ under Article 32 of the Constitution. While for High Courts, which are the apex court in any state, can issue writ under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 'Writ' is eminently designed by the makers of the Constitution, and in the same way it is developed very widely and efficiently by the courts in India. Constitution of India broadly provides for five kinds of 'prerogative writs', namely, Habeas Corpus, Certiorari, Mandamus, Quo Warranto and Prohibition. Basic details of which are as follows:- The writ of prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court prohibiting it from taking up a case because it falls outside the jurisdiction of the lower court. In doing so, the higher court seeks a transfer of the case to itself
- The writ of habeas corpus means 'let us have the body'. It is a writ issued to a detaining authority to produce the detained person in court to know cause for detention. If the detention is found to be illegal, the court issues an order to set the person free.
- The writ of certiorari is one of the writs issued by the High Court or the Supreme court to protect the Fundamental rights of the citizens. It is issued to a lower court directing it that the record of a case be sent up for review with all the files, evidence and documents with an aim to overrule the judgement of the lower court.
- The writ of mandamus is an order of a court of law issued to a subordinate court or an officer of government or a corporation or any other institution commanding the performance of certain acts or duties.
- The writ of quo warranto is issued against a person who claims or usurps a public office. Through this writ the court inquires 'by what authority' the person supports his or her claim.
References
- Maitland F. W. The Forms of Action at Common Law. Cambridge University Press 1962.
- Baker, J. H. An Introduction to English Legal History. Butterworths 1990. ISBN 0-406-53101-3
- Milsom, S. F. C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law (second edition). Butterworths 1981. ISBN 0-406-62503-4
writ in German: Writ
writ in Italian: Writ
writ in Urdu: رٹ