Talk:Latitat
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
I have considerable problems with this article and am considering a complete re-write.
In the first place, latitat, for much of its history, refers to a procedure using a bill and not a writ at all. The article does not make clear that it was devised as a procedural dodge in order to bring cases in the King's Bench rather than the Common Pleas. The quote from Blackstone is hardly illuminating.
Secondly the article seems to think that the King's Bench was the only common law court and in England at least latitat is not "defunct" but abolished (along with the forms of action).
Would anyone object if I subjected this article to a complete re-write?
Francis Davey 21:10, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Start a discussion about improving the Latitat page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Latitat" page.
