Also known as: eo instanti · immediately · at that instant
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A Latin phrase denoting that a legal consequence such as vesting of property or possession arises at the precise instant of a specified act. The phrase emphasizes the absence of any intervening delay between the act and the resulting legal effect.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
After grabbing a wallet from a pedestrian, Edgar Evers sprinted away but used a threat to deter immediate pursuit by the victim. The court held that the threat satisfied the requirement that force or threats be employed to retain possession eo instanter after the taking.
Upon completion of the electoral vote count, the successful candidate assumed the executive power eo instanter for a four-year term as directed by the constitutional appointment process.
Eva Espinosa exclaimed that the car was speeding toward her the moment she perceived the vehicle. The exclamation qualified as a present sense impression because it was made eo instanter while or immediately after she perceived the event.
Ethan Evans threatened to commit arson, a second-degree felony, during a theft. The threat satisfied the robbery element because it was a threat to commit a qualifying felony eo instanter with the taking.
After selling his leased building, Elliot Edmonds remained bound by a maintenance covenant that touched and concerned the property. The obligation continued eo instanter because it rested on privity of contract that the transferee did not release.
Emmett Egan submitted to a threat that physical force would be applied the instant he attempted to leave the room. The submission effected confinement eo instanter under the rule governing threats of immediate force.
The phrase indicates that possession vests in the recipient at the precise moment of payment or transfer, leaving no gap during which a later misappropriation could constitute larceny.
Supporting sources
…Roe. Pp. 129-166. (a) The principle that a court may not enjoin enforcement of a statute unless the plaintiff shows that he is immediately threatened with irreparable injury is not applicable where the plaintiff attacks the facial validity of the statute on the ground that it is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Pp.…