Non Sequitur
Literal meaning: “It does not follow”
What does the Latin term "Non Sequitur" mean in law?
Non sequitur describes a conclusion or argument that does not logically follow from the premises or evidence presented. In legal reasoning, identifying a non sequitur is essential to exposing flawed logic in opposing counsel's arguments, judicial opinions, or legislative findings. A non sequitur can take many forms, including assuming that correlation implies causation, drawing a general conclusion from insufficient specific evidence, or leaping from one proposition to an unrelated conclusion. Appellate courts may characterize a lower court's reasoning as a non sequitur when the legal conclusion is not supported by the factual findings. The term functions both as a tool of logical analysis and as a rhetorical device in advocacy.
Source: General · Legal Latin
Legal Definition
Non sequitur describes a conclusion or argument that does not logically follow from the premises or evidence presented. In legal reasoning, identifying a non sequitur is essential to exposing flawed logic in opposing counsel's arguments, judicial opinions, or legislative findings. A non sequitur can take many forms, including assuming that correlation implies causation, drawing a general conclusion from insufficient specific evidence, or leaping from one proposition to an unrelated conclusion. Appellate courts may characterize a lower court's reasoning as a non sequitur when the legal conclusion is not supported by the factual findings. The term functions both as a tool of logical analysis and as a rhetorical device in advocacy.
How It's Used
Attorneys use non sequitur to challenge the logical validity of opposing arguments in briefs, oral argument, and cross-examination. Judges use the term in opinions to identify gaps in reasoning that undermine a party's position or a lower court's analysis.
Example Sentences
The court found the government's argument to be a non sequitur: the mere fact that the defendant traveled internationally did not logically support the conclusion that he was involved in drug trafficking.
Opposing counsel's claim that the contract was unconscionable because it was lengthy was dismissed as a non sequitur by the trial judge.
The dissent argued that the majority's leap from the statutory text to its broad policy conclusion was a non sequitur unsupported by any recognized canon of interpretation.