In law, the successive steps
or proceedings in the initiation
and conduct of a judicial
proceeding, and the rules of law
governing them. In its broadest
sense the term includes evidence
and pleading. In a narrower
sense the term is used as
synonymous with practice, which
embraces the rules governing the
form and manner of conducting
the various steps in a legal
proceeding other than the rules
of evidence and the rules of
pleading.
The judicial
proceeding may be directed
toward the person, when it is
said to be in personam; or it
may be directed toward the
property, when it is said to be
in rem.
In English jurisprudence three
distinct systems of procedure
corresponding and adapted to
distinct systems of
jurisprudence were developed
respectively by the courts of
common law, the courts of
chancery, and the courts of
admiralty. While necessarily
having many elements in common,
these systems for the most part
differ widely from each other,
and their characteristics can be
best understood by treating each
separately.
Common-Law
Procedure
The common-law procedure is much
older than the procedure in
either equity or admiralty as
practiced by the English courts,
the curia regis which was the
forerunner of the English courts
of Exchequer, Common Pleas, and
King's Bench, in which the
common-law procedure was
developed, having been
established during the reign of
Henry I. (1100-1135). The
common-law procedure was early
marked by extreme formality, and
ultimately it became necessary
to simplify the system by means
of legislation, which has given
to us the various forms of
reformed common-law procedure in
modern use and in many States of
the United states.
The first step in an action at
common law was the issuing of
the original writ on application
of the plaintiff, which
commanded the sheriff to summon
the defendant to give to the
plaintiff the relief demanded by
him or to appear before the next
term of court and show cause why
such relief should not be
granted. The effect of the
original writ was twofold. It
gave the court jurisdiction over
the subject-matter by
authorizing it to proceed with
all subsequent steps in the
litigation. It also gave the
court jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant when the
sheriff had executed the writ by
serving it personally upon him.
It could then issue its process
or mandate compelling the
attendance of the parties and
witnesses, direct the filing of
pleadings, summon and impanel a
jury, and after trial and
verdict enter judgment for the
successful party and issue its
execution or other mandate to
the sheriff for the purpose of
satisfying the judgment.
Historically the original writ
is also important, as from it
the action took its form, since
the plaintiff's pleading was
required to conform to the
allegations and demand for
relief contained in the original
writ. See FORMS OF ACTION.
The original writ having been
issued and served upon the
defendant, it then became his
duty to appear in the proceeding
and plead, and if necessary the
court could compel his
appearance by issuance of its
process known as a judicial writ
as distinguished from the
original writ. The method of
pleading and of trying the
issues raised by the pleadings
is fully considered under such
titles as TRIAL; PLEADING;
EVIDENCE; JURY; etc., to which
reference should be made in
connection with this subject.
During the course of the
proceeding and after verdict,
the parties to the action might
apply to the court for various
forms of relief incidental to
the proper conduct of the
proceeding. Thus upon
application the court might use
the subpoena to command the
attendance of witnesses, and
punish for contempt: and after
verdict the unsuccessful party
might make motions for a
direction of the court in effect
reversing or setting aside the
verdict of the jury. Thus the
unsuccessful party might move:
(a) for a new trial on the
ground that the judge had not
properly instructed the jury or
that he had admitted or excluded
evidence contrary to law or
because of newly discovered
evidence; or (b) he might move
in arrest of judgment on the
ground that some error on the
face of the record vitiated all
the proceedings: or (c) if the
verdict was for the defendant,
the plaintiff might move for
judgment non obstante
verdicto__without regard to the
verdict on the ground that he
was entitled to judgment on the
face of the pleadings; or (d)
for a repleader, i.e. allowing
the parties to plead anew
because they had framed issues
upon some immaterial matter; or
(e) for a venire facias de novo,
that is, a judicial writ
summoning a new jury because the
jury at the trial in the action
was guilty of some misconduct
invalidating its verdict.
Upon denial of these motions
judgment was then entered by the
court, usually by signing of the
judgment by a proper officer of
the court, for the plaintiff (quod
recuperet) or for the defendant
(nil capiat) in accordance with
the verdict. The successful
party was then entitled to
enforce the judgment by the writ
of execution. If, however, the
unsuccessful party deemed the
judgment erroneous in law he was
at liberty to remove the entire
record of the case to a higher
court for review upon suing out
a writ of error, which, like the
original writ, was issued out of
Chancery.
Such in its barest outline was
the method of procedure
developed by the common-law
courts. The material elements of
the system, except possibly
those of the system of pleading,
remain unchanged, although there
has been great modification of
the minor details, chiefly in
the direction of greater
simplicity. The first of these
changes was in the use of the
original writ. By the use of a
series of fictions the
common-law courts came
ultimately to dispense with the
original writ as a means of
acquiring jurisdiction, and the
action was regularly begun by
the issuance by the courts of
law of their judicial process,
the summons directly, instead of
the original writ. In each of
the United States there are now
courts established by statute
having general jurisdiction over
actions and authorized to
acquire jurisdiction over the
person of litigants upon service
of its summons or writ. The
summons is still issued in the
name of the court, but usually
attorneys as officers of the
court are authorized to issue
the summons directly without
application to the court. This
is true also of many other forms
of process, as, for example,
subpoenas to appear and testify,
and the writ of execution.
The various changes in the
system of pleading, which are
more substantial than any which
have taken place in procedure
proper, have been noted under
that title, but the system of
pleading has been indirectly
modified by changes in
procedure. Thus the remedy for
formal defects, which was
formerly by demurrer, is now by
statute generally a motion to
strike out immaterial matter or
to make the pleading more
definite and certain. A party
may be required to define and
limit the scope of his pleading
by a motion for an order
directing him to give a bill of
particulars of his claim. There
are also various forms of relief
incidental to the proceeding
which have been created anew or
adopted from the equity practice
by statute; as, for example, the
examination of witnesses before
trial or by commission, the
practice of referring some part
or all of the controversy to a
referee having substantially the
power of court, and the granting
of various provisional remedies,
such as attachment and arrest.
The extent to which execution
against the person requiring the
arrest of a defendant for
non-payment of a judgment may be
used has been much limited by
modern statute, but in many
States the plaintiff is given a
statutory right to examine the
judgment debtor as to his
resources and give an
appropriate remedy by receiver
or otherwise by which the
application of moneys due to the
judgment debtors to payment of
the judgment may be compelled.
The practice on appeal has also
been simplified, mere notice of
the appeal served upon the
appellant's opponent being all
that is generally required to
perfect the appeal.
Common-law courts also exercised
jurisdiction in personam by what
were known as the extraordinary
writs___certiorari, habeas
corpus, quo warranto, and
mandamus.
For the procedure in criminal
actions, see PROSECUTOR;
PROSECUTION; INDICTMENT; JURY;
GRAND JURY; PUNISHMENT, etc.