Legal Definitions - de maritagio amisso per defaltam

The term de maritagio amisso per defaltam is a historical legal concept originating from medieval English law. It refers to a specific type of legal document, known as a writ, that allowed a person to reclaim land that had been granted as part of a "frankmarriage" and subsequently lost due to a legal "default."

• A frankmarriage was a special kind of land gift, typically made by a father to his daughter and her husband upon their marriage. This gift was intended to establish the new couple and their future children, and it usually came with certain privileges, such as being free from feudal services for a period.
• A default in this context generally meant a failure to perform a legal duty, such as appearing in court when summoned, or failing to meet a legal obligation, which could result in a judgment against the landholder and the loss of the property.

Therefore, this writ was a legal remedy for someone who had lost their frankmarriage land because of a procedural misstep or a failure to defend their claim in court.

Examples:

Here are a few scenarios illustrating how this historical writ might have been used:

1. Scenario: Procedural Default in Court

   Imagine Lady Eleanor, who received land in frankmarriage upon her wedding to Sir Thomas. Years later, a neighboring baron initiated a legal claim against a portion of their land, asserting an old feudal right. Lady Eleanor and Sir Thomas were summoned to the King's court but, due to a severe illness that incapacitated Sir Thomas and prevented them from traveling, they failed to appear on the designated day. As a result, the court, following standard procedure, issued a judgment by default, awarding the disputed land to the baron.

   How it illustrates the term: In this situation, Lady Eleanor and Sir Thomas would have sought the writ de maritagio amisso per defaltam to challenge the default judgment. They would argue that their failure to appear was excusable and that the land, part of their frankmarriage, should be returned to them despite the procedural default.

2. Scenario: Failure to Present an Effective Defense

   Consider the descendants of a frankmarriage grant, the Miller family, who held a valuable parcel of farmland. A powerful local lord, seeking to expand his own holdings, brought a spurious claim against their land, alleging a breach of an obscure feudal duty. The Millers, being simple farmers with limited legal knowledge and resources, appeared in court but were unable to articulate a proper legal defense against the lord's well-represented arguments. The court, perceiving their inability to defend as a form of default in presenting a valid counter-claim, ruled in favor of the lord, and the land was seized.

   How it illustrates the term: The Miller family would have used this writ to appeal the decision, arguing that their inability to effectively defend their rights constituted a default that led to the loss of their frankmarriage land, and that the land should be restored to them.

3. Scenario: Default by a Third Party Affecting Frankmarriage Land

   Lord Alaric granted a significant estate in frankmarriage to his daughter, Lady Isabella, and her husband. This estate was part of a larger feudal holding. Later, a distant relative, who held an adjacent parcel of land from the same overlord (but not part of Isabella's frankmarriage), failed to perform his required military service. As a consequence of this relative's default, the overlord sought to seize not only the relative's land but also a portion of Lady Isabella's frankmarriage estate, claiming a broader right due to the overall default within his feudal domain.

   How it illustrates the term: Lady Isabella and her husband would have invoked the writ de maritagio amisso per defaltam. They would contend that their frankmarriage land was lost due to a default, albeit one committed by a third party, and that their specific grant should protect them from such an indirect loss, allowing them to reclaim their property.