Legal Definitions - nient seisi

Nient seisi is a historical legal term that refers to a general denial made by a defendant in a lawsuit concerning an annuity.

In simpler terms, when someone was sued to force them to pay an annuity—a fixed sum of money paid periodically, often annually, to another person—the defendant could use "nient seisi" as their primary defense. This meant they were broadly denying that they were obligated to pay the annuity at all, rather than disputing specific details of the claim. It was a comprehensive rejection of the plaintiff's right to receive the payments.

Here are some examples illustrating how "nient seisi" would have been used historically:

• Example 1: Disputed Inheritance Obligation

  Imagine a wealthy landowner, Lord Ashworth, who passed away. His will stipulated that his eldest son, Sir Reginald, should pay an annuity to a distant cousin, Lady Eleanor, for her lifetime. Years later, Lady Eleanor sues Sir Reginald because the annuity payments have stopped. Sir Reginald, believing the annuity was never a legally binding obligation on him personally, might have entered a plea of nient seisi. This would signify his general denial that he was "seised" (legally obligated or possessed) of the duty to pay Lady Eleanor any annuity whatsoever.

• Example 2: Former Employee's Pension Claim

  Consider a master craftsman, Master Thomas, who had promised a lifelong annuity to his long-serving apprentice, John, upon John's retirement. After Master Thomas's death, his widow, Mrs. Thomas, inherited the estate. When John, now retired, sought his annuity payments from Mrs. Thomas, she might have responded with nient seisi in court. This would be her way of broadly denying that the estate, and by extension herself, had any legal obligation to pay John the promised annuity, perhaps arguing the promise was never formally binding or was conditional.

• Example 3: Business Agreement Gone Awry

  Two merchants, Mr. Davies and Mr. Evans, entered into a complex business partnership. As part of their agreement, Mr. Davies was to pay Mr. Evans an annuity for ten years after the partnership dissolved. After the dissolution, Mr. Davies refused to make the payments. When Mr. Evans initiated a legal action to recover the annuity, Mr. Davies could have used nient seisi as his defense. This would mean he was generally denying that he was legally bound to pay the annuity, perhaps claiming the underlying agreement was invalid or that Mr. Evans had breached his own terms, thereby nullifying the annuity obligation.