Lex Regia

A law by which it was claimed that the legislative power was transferred by the Roman people to the emperor. Inst. 1, 2. 6. Whether such a law was passed has been doubted. 1 Kent, Comm. 544; Tayl. Civ. Law, 236, note. LEX REI SITAE (Lat.) The law of the place of situation of the thing.

The law of the emperor. That which he ordains by rescript, or decides in adjudging a cause, or lays down by edict, is law. Inst. 1. 2. 6. LEX REI SIT (Lat). The law of the country where a thing Is situate. Dicey, Confl. Laws 66. It is said to be an inexact mode of expression; lex aitua, or lex loci rei aitce are better. 29 L. Q. R. 2 (H. Gondy). It is the universal rule of the common law that any title or interest in land, or in other real estate, can only be acquired or lost agreeably to the law of the place where the same is situated; Blake v. Williams, 6 Pick.' (Mass.) 286, 17 Am. Dec. 372; Hosford V. Nichols, 1 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 220; Wills V. Cowper, 2 Ohio, 124; 5 B. & C. 438; Mc- Cormick V. Sullivant, 10 Wheat. (U. S.) 192, 6 L. Ed. 30p; Darby v. Mayer, 10 Wheat. (U. S.) 465, 6 L. Ed. 307; Story, Confl. Laws §§ 366, 428; Hutchinson Inv. Co. v. Caldwell, 152 U. S. 66, 14 Sup. Ct. 504, 38 L. Ed. 356; Arndt 'v. Griggs, 134 U. S. 316, 10 Sup. Ct. 567, 33 L. Ed. 918; Sewall v. Haymaker, 127 U. S. 719, 8 Sup. Ct. 1348, 32 L. Ed. 299; and every restraint upon alienation; 12 <E. I. & Eq. 206. The lex rei aitw governs as to the capacity of the parties to any allendtlon, whether testamentary or inter vivoa, or to make a contract with regard to a movable, or to acquire or succeed to a movable as affected by questions of minority or majority; Saul' V. His Creditors, 6 Mart. N. S. ( La. ) 669, 16 Am. Dec. 212; of rights arising from the relation of husband and wife; Story, Confl. Laws § 454; 9 Bligh 127; Le Breton v. Miles, 8 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 261; Newcomer v. Orem, 2 Md. 297, 66 Am. Dec. 717; Duncan v. Dick, Walk. (Miss.) 281; Richardson v. De Giverville, 107 Mo. 422, 17 S. W. 974, 28 Am. St. Rep. 426; L. R. 8 Ch. 342; see Robinson v. Queen, 87 Tenn. 445, 11 S. W. 38, 8 L. R. A. 214, 10 Am. St. Rep. 690; parent and child, or guardian and ward; 2 Ves. & B. 127; Morrell v. Dickey, 1 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 153; Kraft v. Wickey, 4 Gill & J. (Md.) 332, 23 Am. Dec. 569; Moore V. Hood, 9 Rich. Eq. (S. C.) 31i; 70 Am. Dec. 210; Martin v. Mc Donald, 14 B. Monr. (Ky.) 544; Cox v. Williamson, 11 Ala. 343; Hlnos V. State, 10 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 529; but see In re Morgan, 7 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 236; and of the rights and powers of executors and administrators, whether the property be real or personal; 8 Cl. & F. 112; Dixon v. Ramsay, 3 Cra. (U. S.) 319, 2 L. Ed. 453; Smith V. Bank, 5 Pet. (U. S.) 618, 8 L. Ed. 212; Thompson v. Wilson, 2 N. H. 291; Stearns v. Burnham, 5 Greenl. (Me.) 261, 17 Am. Dec. 228; In re Picquet, 5 Pick. (Mass.) 65; Holmes v. Remsen, 20 Johns. (N. Y.) 229, 11 Am. Dec. 269; Riley v. Riley, 3 Day (Conn.) 74, 3 Am. Dec. 260; Slauter v. Chenowlth, 7 Ind. 211; Kirkpatrick v. Taylor, 10 Rich. (S. C.) 393 (see Executors); of heirs; 5 B. & C. 451; Kerr v. Moon, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 566, 6 L. Ed. 161; and of devisee or devisor; Story, Confl. Laws § 474; 14 Ves. 337; Doe V. Mc Farland, 9 Cra. (U. S.) 151, 3 L. Ed. 687; Mc Cormick v. Sullivant, 10 Wheat. (U. S.) 192, 6 L. Ed. 300; Eyre v. Storer, 37 N. H. 114. So as to the forms and solemnities of alienation, and the restrictions, if any, imposed upon such alienation, the lex rei aitw must be complied with, whether it be a transfer by devise; 2 P. Wms. 291; Mc Cormick V. Sullivant, 10 Wheat (U. S.) 192, 6 L. Ed. 300; Wills V. Cowper, 2 Ohio 124; Eyre v. Storer, 37 N. H. 114; Bowen v. Johnson, 5 R. I. 112, 73 Am. Dec. 49; Drake v. Merrill, 48 N. C. 368; Keith v. Keith, 97 Mo. 223, 10 S. W. 597; Ware v. Wisner, 60 Fed. 310; Robertson v. Plckrell, 109 U. S. 608, 3 Sup. Ct 407, 27 L. Ed. 1049; Crolly v. Clark, 20 Fla. 849 (but in Maine, under statutes, an attestation made in conformity with the law of the place where the will was executed, was held valid; Lyon v. Ogden, 86 Me. 374, Pick. (Mass.) 81, 11 Am, Dec. 149; Hosford y. Nichols, 1 Paige Ch, (N. Y.) 220; Frazier V. Moore’s Adm’r, 11 Tex. 755; Donaldson V. Phillips, 18 Pa. 170, 66 Am. Dec. 614. So as to the amount of property or extent of interest which can be acquired, held, or transferred; 3 Russ. Ch. 328; 2 Dow. & C. 393; and the question of what is real property; 1 W. Bla. 234; Chapman v. Robertson, 6 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 630, 31 Am. Dec. 264, The law of a country where a thing is situate determines whether the thing Itself, or any right, obligation, or document connected with the thing is to be considered an Immovable (land), or a movable; Dicey, Confl. Laws 513. And, generally, the lex rei aitw governs as to the validity of any such transfer; Glenn V. Thistle, 23 Miss, 42; Depas v, Mayo, 11 Mo. 314, 49 Am. Dec. 88; Bloomer v. Bloomer, 2 Bradf. Surr. (N. Y.) 339; Post v. Bank, 138 111. 559, 28 N. E. 978. As to the disposition of the proceeds, see 12 E, L. & Eq. 206. The validity, construction, and effect of wills of movables depend upon the lex rei 8itw; Penfleld v. Tower, 1 N. D. 216, 46 N. W. 413; Ware v. Wisner, 50 Fed. 310; Moody V, Johnson, 112 N. C, 798, 17 S. E. 678; but the law of the state where the will was made may be considered by the court of the situs in determining the meaning of certain words in it; Guerard v. Guerard, 73 Ga, 506, The validity of a charitable devise; Jones v, Habersham, 107 U. S. 174, 2 Sup. Ct, 3.36, 27 L. Ed. 401; and a direction for accumulation; Riggs V. American Tract Soc., 95 N. Y. 508; depend upon the lex rei aitw, and so docs the execution of a power of appointment of lands under a will; Sewall v. Wilmer, 132 Mass. 131; and the devolution of land, whether in case of Intestacy or under a will; Dicey, Confl. Laws 519, The acquisition of a title to land by lapse of time (prescription) must be determined by the same law, except so far as the limitation to an action to recover land depends on the lex fori; id. 525; and see Whart, Confl. Laws § 378. As to whether mere contracts with regard to immovables or land are determined by the lex rei si Ux, as to their material validity, or by the “proper law of the contract,” is said to be doubtful; Dicey, Confl. Laws 769; but the capacity of the parties thereto and the formalities necessary to the validity of such a contract are, almost certainly, governed by the law of the situs; id. As to the “proper law of the contract,” see ijnc Loci; CoNFi-icT OF Laws. A contract for the conveyance of land, valid by the lex fori, will be enforced in equity by a decree (n personam for a conveyance valid under the lex rei sitce; 1 Ves. 144; Mitchell v. Bunch, 2 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) An executory foreign contract for the conveyance of lands not repugnant to the lex rei sites will be enforced in the courts of the latter country by personal process; 8 Paige, Ch. 201; 23 E. L. & Eq. 288. Courts of the situs may refuse to enforce foreign assignments for creditoi’s as against domestic creditors; May v. Bank, 122 111. 551, 13 N. E. 806; Warner v. Jaffray, 96 N. Y. 248, 48 Am. Rep. 616; but see supra, for contrary decisions. All simple contract debts are assetsat the domicil of the testator; Wyman v. Halstead, 109 U. S. 654, 3 Sup. Ct 417, 27 L. Ed. 1068; but a bond is said to be assets for the purpose of administration at the place where it is found; Beers v. Shannon, 73 N. Y, 292. A ship at sea is presumed to bsituated in the state where it is registered; Crapo V. Kelly, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 610, 21 L. Ed. 4.30. As to the English rules relating to the situs of movables, see Dicey, Confl. Laws 318. See General Average.

The royal or imperial law. A law enacted (or supposed or claimed to have been enacted) by the Roman people, constituting the emperor a source of law, conferring the legislative power upon him, and according the force and obligation of law to the expression of his mere will or pleasure. See Inst. 1, 2. 6; Gaius, 1, 5 ; Mackeld. Rom. Law, § 48; Heinecc. Rom. Ant. 1. 1, tit. 2, §§ 62
—67; 1 Kent, Comm. 544, note.

Defined under Lex in Black's Law Dictionary.

In Roman law. The royal or imperial law. A law enacted (or supposed or claimed to have been enacted} by the Roman people, constituting the emperor a source of law, conferring the legislative nere will or pleasure, See Inst. 1, 2, 6; Faivs, 1, 5; Mackeld, Rom. Law, § 46; Aeinece. Rom. Ant. 1. 1, tit. 2, §§ 62-67; 1 «ent, Comm, 544, note.