Legal Definitions - ex abundanti

Ex abundanti is an archaic legal phrase meaning "out of abundance" or "superfluously." It refers to an action or statement that goes beyond what is strictly required, often done to ensure absolute clarity, certainty, or thoroughness, even if it introduces some redundancy.

• Example 1: Legal Filings

  A defense attorney files a motion to dismiss a case, presenting three very strong legal arguments that should be sufficient for the judge to grant the dismissal. Ex abundanti, the attorney also includes a fourth, slightly weaker argument, not because it's strictly necessary, but to ensure every conceivable angle is covered and to leave no room for the opposing side to challenge the thoroughness of the motion.

  This illustrates "ex abundanti" because the fourth argument is added superfluously; the first three arguments were already abundant enough to support the motion.

• Example 2: Contract Drafting

  In a commercial lease agreement, a clause clearly states that the tenant is responsible for all utility costs. Ex abundanti, the landlord's lawyer adds a separate, specific sentence reiterating that "this includes, but is not limited to, electricity, water, and gas charges," even though the initial broad statement already covered these items. This is done to prevent any potential future dispute over specific utility types.

  Here, the specific reiteration of utility types is included "out of abundance" because the general clause already covered them, but the lawyer added it for extra, perhaps redundant, clarity.

• Example 3: Presenting Evidence

  During a criminal trial, the prosecution has already presented irrefutable DNA evidence, a clear confession from the defendant, and multiple eyewitness testimonies. Ex abundanti, they also introduce a detailed timeline of the defendant's social media posts from the day of the crime, which only marginally supports their case. They do this simply to pile on every possible piece of information, even if it's not critical for conviction.

  The social media timeline is presented "superfluously" because the prosecution already possesses an "abundance" of strong evidence, but they choose to add more for absolute thoroughness.