Legal Definitions - writ of error

A writ of error was a formal legal order issued by a higher court (an appellate court) to a lower court. Its purpose was to demand that the lower court send the complete record of a specific case to the appellate court. The appellate court would then review this record to identify any significant mistakes of law that the lower court might have made during the original trial or proceeding.

Historically, a special type called a writ of error coram nobis was used when there were alleged errors of fact that were not known at the time of the original trial and would have fundamentally changed the outcome. This type of writ was typically directed to the same court that made the original judgment, asking it to review its own decision based on these newly discovered factual errors.

Today, the writ of error is largely obsolete in the United States legal system:

• In civil cases, it has been replaced by modern procedural rules, primarily the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rules 59 and 60, which provide mechanisms for seeking relief from judgments or appealing decisions.
• In criminal cases, while not formally abolished, its function has been largely taken over by other post-conviction remedies, such as motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which allow individuals to challenge their convictions or sentences. The Supreme Court has noted that it is now difficult to imagine a situation where a writ of error would be necessary or appropriate in criminal proceedings.

Here are some examples illustrating how a writ of error would have functioned historically:

• Example 1 (Historical Civil Case - Legal Error): Imagine a complex business contract dispute in the early 20th century. The trial judge, in interpreting a key clause of the contract, applied an outdated legal precedent that had since been overturned by a higher court. As a result, the judgment unfairly favored one party. The losing party could have petitioned an appellate court for a writ of error. This writ would have compelled the trial court to send all the case documents, including the judge's rulings and the trial transcript, to the appellate court. The appellate court would then review these records to determine if the judge's application of the outdated precedent constituted a reversible legal error, potentially leading to the reversal of the trial court's decision.

• Example 2 (Historical Criminal Case - Legal Error): Consider a criminal trial from the mid-20th century where the judge, during jury instructions, incorrectly defined a crucial element of the crime, making it easier for the prosecution to prove guilt than the law actually required. After being convicted, the defendant's attorney might have sought a writ of error from a higher court. This writ would have required the trial court to transmit the entire case file, including the specific jury instructions given. The appellate court would then examine those instructions to see if they contained a significant legal error that prejudiced the defendant, which could result in the conviction being overturned and a new trial ordered.

• Example 3 (Illustrating Coram Nobis - Factual Error): Suppose in the 1940s, a person was convicted of fraud. Years later, a previously unknown, official government document surfaced that conclusively proved a key piece of evidence presented by the prosecution at trial was fabricated, and this fabrication was central to the conviction. This document was not available or discoverable at the time of the original trial. The convicted individual might have petitioned the *original trial court* for a writ of error coram nobis. This writ would have asked that same court to re-examine its judgment in light of this newly discovered, irrefutable factual error, potentially leading to the conviction being vacated. This differs from a standard writ of error because it focuses on a fundamental factual mistake rather than a misapplication of law by the judge.