|more useful options|
"replevin" or "tortefeasor".
I laughed, and I hope you will to. According to google, it should be "tortfeasor" (no 'e') by a margin of 322,000 to 6 :p
None the less, your point is well taken. In the context of modern law, the use of these pointed, sparse remnents of Latin are indeed a shorthand notation with very particular meanings.
In my defense, I was thinking more about the historical practice whereby all legal documents had to be enscribed entirely in Latin. A practice that came about, or rather survived, mostly because it meant that only the privileded few could produce, read or hope to benefit from them. Not to mention that it meant that laywers were required to produce and interpret them.
To a great extent, the latter practice still persists albeit that the Latin content is not the root cause. For example, 25 years ago, when I purchased my first flat, it cost me £365 in laywers fees to complete the purchase of a 15% share of a £12,000 property.
2 years ago, I self-conveyanced the transfer and sale of a let property (£200,000;my previous home), and completed the entire transaction for £65. The only complications were due to the other party's lawyer raising and re-raising a series of totally pedantic points, in what the other party and I concluded was an attempt to put him off of the purchase, simply because I was not using a lawyer.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.