Legal Definitions - absque tali causa

Absque tali causa is a Latin legal phrase that translates to "without such cause."

Historically, in common-law legal procedures, this phrase was used by a plaintiff (the party bringing the lawsuit) to challenge a specific justification or excuse offered by a defendant (the party being sued). When a defendant claimed they had a valid reason for their actions, the plaintiff could respond by asserting that the defendant's actions were wrongful and occurred without the particular cause the defendant alleged. It essentially served as a direct denial of the defendant's specific excuse, arguing that the defendant's stated reason was not true or sufficient.

Here are some examples to illustrate its application:

• Property Damage Dispute:

  Imagine a homeowner sues a tree-trimming company for damaging their roof while working on a nearby tree. The tree-trimming company defends itself by stating that the roof damage was unavoidable because the roof was already in a severe state of disrepair and structurally unsound, making it impossible to work without causing further damage.

  In a historical pleading context, the homeowner could argue that the company damaged their roof absque tali causa. This means the homeowner would be asserting that the roof was not in a severe state of disrepair as claimed by the company, and therefore, the damage occurred without the specific justification the company provided.

• Breach of Contract for Services:

  Consider a business owner who sues a marketing agency for failing to deliver a promised advertising campaign by the agreed-upon launch date. The marketing agency claims the delay was entirely due to the business owner's repeated and extensive delays in providing necessary content and approvals, which made it impossible to meet the deadline.

  The business owner might argue that the marketing agency failed to deliver the campaign absque tali causa. This would mean the business owner is contending that their delays were minor or within reasonable expectations, and thus, the marketing agency's failure to meet the deadline was not legitimately caused by the client's actions as alleged.

• Disputed Detention:

  Suppose a person sues a department store for false imprisonment, claiming they were unlawfully detained by a security guard. The department store defends by stating the security guard had reasonable grounds to believe the person was shoplifting, having observed them concealing merchandise.

  The detained person could, in a historical legal context, argue that they were detained absque tali causa. This means they would be asserting that they did not conceal merchandise or engage in any shoplifting behavior, and therefore, the security guard's stated reason for detention was unfounded and without legitimate cause.