Legal Definitions - post disseisina

Post Disseisina

This Latin term refers to a situation where an individual who has been wrongfully dispossessed of their land or property (an act known as "disseisin") and subsequently regains possession, is then wrongfully dispossessed *again* by the same party. Historically, it also referred to a specific legal remedy designed to address such repeated acts of dispossession, often imposing a more severe penalty for the second offense due to its defiance of prior legal resolution.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: The Repeated Boundary Encroachment

  Imagine a homeowner, Ms. Rodriguez, who discovers her neighbor, Mr. Henderson, has wrongfully extended his garden fence onto a small portion of her property. Ms. Rodriguez takes legal action, and a court orders Mr. Henderson to remove the fence and restore the land to her. After Ms. Rodriguez regains full use of her property, Mr. Henderson, a few months later, again extends his fence onto the *same* strip of Ms. Rodriguez's land. This second, repeated wrongful taking of possession by Mr. Henderson, after Ms. Rodriguez had already recovered her property, would be an instance of post disseisina.

• Example 2: The Persistent Commercial Eviction

  Consider a small business owner, Mr. Lee, who leases a storefront for his bakery. His landlord, without proper legal cause or notice, changes the locks and prevents Mr. Lee from accessing his business. Mr. Lee successfully obtains a court order compelling the landlord to restore his access and allow him to resume operations. However, just a week later, the landlord again changes the locks and bars Mr. Lee from his storefront. This second, wrongful eviction by the same landlord, after Mr. Lee had legally regained possession, exemplifies post disseisina.

• Example 3: Historical Land Seizure

  In a historical context, if a powerful Duke wrongfully seized a valuable estate from a local Baron (the initial disseisin), and the Baron successfully used a legal process to recover his estate and its lands. If the Duke, defying the legal judgment, subsequently sent his forces to again forcibly occupy the *same* estate and expel the Baron, this second act of dispossession by the Duke would be considered post disseisina. The law would have viewed this repeated offense with particular gravity, often imposing harsher penalties than for the initial wrongful act.