Inter Apices Juris

See "Apex Juris." INTER CAETEROS (Lat.) Among others; in a general clause; not by name (nominatim). A term applied, in the civil law, to clauses of disinheritance in a will. Inst. 2. 13. 1; Id. 2. 13. 3. INTER CANEM ET LUPUM (Lat. between the dog and the wolf). The twilight; because then the dog seeks his rest, and the wolf his prey. 3 Inst. 63.

See Apex Juris. INTER CiCTEROS. Among others; In a general clause; not by name {noniinatim). A term applied in the civil law to clauses of disinheritance in a will. Inst 2, 13, 1; id. 2, 13, 3. INTER CAN EM ET LUPUM (Lat between the dog and the wolf). The twilight; because then the dog seeks his rest and the woif his prey. Co. 3d Inst 63. INTER PARTES (Lat between the parties). A phrase signifying an agreement prbfessing in the outset, and before any stipulations are introduced, to be made between such and such persons: as, for example, “This indenture, made the — s — day of, 1848, between A B of the one part, and C D of the other.” It is true that every contract is in one sense inter partes, because to be valid there must be two parties at least; but the technical sense of this expression is as above mentioned; Addison, Contr. 9. This being a solemn declaration, the effect of such introduction is to make all the covenants comprised in a deed to be covenants between the parties and none others: so that should a stipulation be found in the body of a deed by which “the said A B covenants with E F to pay him one hundred dollars,” the words “with B F” are inoperabeen made, being in direct contradiction with what was previously declared, and O D alope can sue for the non-payment; it being a maxim that where two opposite intentions are expressed in a contract, the first in order shall prevail; 7 M. & W. 63. But this rule does not apply to simple contracts inter paries; 2 D. & R. 277. When there are more than two sides to a contract inter partes, for example, a deed, as, when it is made between A B of the first part, C D of the second, and E F of the third, there is no objection to one covenanting with another in exclusion of the third. See 5 Co. 182; 4 Q. B. 207. ■