Legal Subject: Adjudication

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
Alexander Geddes and Allan Clark v. Jean Bull	1796	Marriage, Adjudication, Legitimacy, Reduction, Succession, Disposition	Alexander Geddes and Allan Clarke petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutor in their action against Jean Bull. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Archibald and James Robertson v. John Laird	1790	Adjudication, Arrestment, Aliment, Inhibition, Insurance, Defamation	Thomas Cochran, weaver in Leith, filed answers to the petition of Margaret Clark, spouse of James Greig, sailor in Leith, responding to allegations of riot and damage. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Blyth v. Lord Dreghorn's Interlocutor	1789	Debt, Adjudication, Creditor, Arrestment, Aliment, Succession	Walter Blyth, as pursuer, presented a petition challenging an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Dreghorn. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Boyd (Provost of Linlithgow) v. Cunningham	1832	Interlocutor, Suspension, Expenses, Adjudication, Sist, Corporation	Cuninghams & Bell, W.S., asked the Court to allow them to sist themselves as parties in the suspension between pursuer John Boyd and defender George Cunninghame, seeking to repeat the interlocutor in their favour. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Cameron v. Cameron	1792	Lease, Succession, Tack, Aliment, Liferent, Adjudication	Ro. Craigie petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutors sustaining claims to the lands of Laick and Branahawn. The respondent argued that the lease of those lands secured by her father ought to be upheld notwithstanding contested settlements and allegations of hardship.
Cheape and Lindsay v. Campbell and Creditors	1795	Debt, Adjudication, Creditor, Sale, Succession, Estate	Donald Campbell petitioned to challenge Lord Dregborn's interlocutor permitting creditors James Lindsay and James Cheape to pursue separate adjudications against an estate Campbell was selling as apparent heir, arguing such actions were unnecessary and costly. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Chisholm v. Lord Gardenston's Interlocutor	1791	Aliment, Heritor, Contract, Tack, Adjudication, Sequestration	William Chisholm petitioned the Court to alter Lord Gardenston's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Common Agent v. Corrie	1794	Adjudication, Interlocutor, Execution, Personal Objection, Courts, Expenses	Common Agent petitioned the court, arguing that Corrie's decree of cognition was void because it had not been properly notified. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Countess of Loudon, and Others v. The Trustees on the High Roads in Ayrshire	1792	Jurisdiction, Trustees, Appeal, Sequestration, Act of Parliament, Adjudication	The Countess of Loudoun and others pursued the Trustees on the High Roads in Ayrshire regarding the proposed suppression of the road by Crawfordland-bridge, while the Trustees and associated justices of the peace defended the road's continued operation. The Trustees initially challenged the Court's jurisdiction to review their proceedings, then argued in subsequent pleadings that the road served public convenience and must be kept open. The parties exchanged answers, replies, and duplies contesting both the Court's authority to intervene and whether the road should remain open or be suppressed.
Cowan v. M'Intosh and Others	1795	Adjudication, Interest, Disposition, Feu duties, Rent, Feu	Robert Cowan petitioned the Court to overturn an interlocutor that had dismissed his process against Mary and Katharine Gordon, the exposers of lands in Blythwoodholme. M'Intosh and others, as respondents, opposed the suspension by arguing that Cowan had breached the articles of roup by failing to grant bond for the purchase price and drawing rents without security.
Crawford, et al v. Morrison, et al	1787	Election contest, Aliment, Election, Mala Fides, Adjudication, Inhibition	Thomas Crawford, Charles Pirrie, Alexander Paterson, and John Gardner pursued John Morrison and others to have Morrison’s election as Deacon of the Incorporation of Wrights in Glasgow declared void. The respondents defended the 1787 election as having proceeded by lawful procedure and majority vote, and further averred that the complainants had themselves accepted office under the contested appointment.
Creditors of Dunbar v. Grant	1793	Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Adjudication, Reduction, Arrestment	Alexander Penrose Cuming and other creditors of Thomas Dunbar of Westfield had obtained an interlocutor voiding, under the 1621 Act, a bond of corroboration granted by the bankrupt to Sir James Grant of Grant, Baronet, as a fraudulent preference. Grant petitioned for reconsideration, contending the bond was merely a lawful acknowledgment of debt and not a preference. The creditors answered, defending the interlocutor and responding to Grant's claims regarding the validity of the instrument.
Creditors of Hay v. Fleming	1793	Debt, Creditor, Adjudication, Bill of Exchange, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy	James Fleming, defender in the action by the creditors of Hay, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor that had excluded him from an adjudication upon the debtor’s Scottish property, maintaining that his claim was liquidated by bill and sufficiently authenticated by protest and affidavit notwithstanding the original instrument’s absence abroad. He sought to overturn the Inner-House ruling and obtain remit to the Lord Ordinary to lead further proof of his debt’s verity.
Creditors of John Horn	1791	Sequestration, Creditor, Trustee, Adjudication, Interlocutor, Statute	George Wilson, trustee for the creditors of John Horn, petitioned to alter an interlocutor allowing individual creditors to adjudicate post-sequestration, citing statutory prohibition and the risk of confusion or penalty preference. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Creditors of Kenneth Mackenzie v. His Children	1792	Creditor, Adjudication, Statute, Arrestment, Debt, Interlocutor	The creditors of Kenneth Mackenzie, as pursuers, contended against his children, as defenders, that adjudications made without intimation were void and null, as set forth in the Information of John Peter du Rouvray and others. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Dumfries v. Campbell	1795	Heritor, Tailzie, Adjudication, Interlocutor, Non-Entry, Rent	Dumfries, as heir to his mother and petitioner, sought to alter an interlocutor of December 1792 that had permitted the transference of an action of non-entry against him. Campbell responded that a declarator of nonentry commenced against the mother could be transferred in statu quo against her son and heir without requiring that he first take a passive title.
Duncan Davidson and Charles Graham v. John Fraser and his Attornies	1798	Bankruptcy, Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Jurisdiction, Adjudication	Duncan Davidson and Charles Graham challenged an interlocutor dismissing their bond claim against George Gun Munro, contending that an English bankruptcy commission had not transferred their debt to assignees for enforcement in Scotland. They subsequently answered a petition by John Fraser, responding to the Court's interlocutor on questions of creditor ranking and the validity of diligence.
Dunmore and Company v. Allan, et al	1786	Ships, Insurance, Warranty, Adjudication, Bill of Exchange, Contract	Robert Dunmore and Company, merchants in Glasgow, raised an action against Richard Allan and other insurers in Glasgow and Archibald Campbell and other insurers in Greenock regarding a maritime insurance contract and questions of convoy obligations and warranty terms. The merchants petitioned the Court to overturn an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Braxfield, and the insurers answered the petition.
Dunn v. Johnston, et al	1796	Creditor, Adjudication, Interlocutor, Ranking of Creditors, Ranking and Sale, Diligence	Mr Johnston of Carnfalloch petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary that postponed his interest in the ranking, on the basis that the adjudication had been led after certification. The respondents answered, disputing the argument that an adjudication obtained after certification should be ranked with preference.
Earl of Rednor v. Macarthur	1791	Succession, Disposition, Trust, Debt, Assignation, Adjudication	Archibald Macarthur Stewart, defender in the action by the Earl of Rednor, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Erskine v. Erskine	1795	Succession, Creditor, Adjudication, Debt, Disposition, Prescription	The respondent Erskine argued that the marriage contract of 1738 constituted an onerous deed in favour of George Erskine that bound his heir to denude the lands. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
George Haldane, and Others v. Charleton Palmer	1791	Trustee, Creditor, Adjudication, Debt, Sale, Succession	George Haldane and other creditors pursued Charleton Palmer regarding the sale of the Grange estate and the ranking of claims to the proceeds. The creditors of W. Belchier argued that a summons of sale raised at the instance of an apparent heir does not operate as an adjudication for the behoof of the whole creditors, while Haldane sought to have his interest ranked pari passu with the other creditors.
Gow v. Russel	1794	Inhibition, Adjudication, Aliment, Possession, Evidence, Property	Nathaniel Gow pursued James Russel, an upholsterer, to abate a nuisance allegedly created by Russel's workshop operations in the upper floor, which Gow's family claimed caused excessive noise and ceiling damage contrary to Edinburgh's police rules. Gow argued that the workshop use violated the police regulations and warranted removal, while Russel maintained that the occasional noise inherent to an upholsterer's trade did not constitute a nuisance justifying such relief.
Hamilton v. Hamilton's Creditors	1777	Ranking and Sale, Process, Adjudication	In 1761, George Hamilton inherited Easter-Queenslie and Provanhall from his brother, Robert, along with some heavy debts. Hamilton later accumulated additional debts, and his other brother, John, acted as cautioner for many of them. In 1769, George Hamilton executed an absolute disposition in favor John over the Wester-Mailing of Easter-Queenslie, as security over the aforementioned debts. Over the years George Hamilton granted other wadsets to his creditors over other parts of his estate. By 1773, he had gone bankrupt, and the Court sequestrated the rents of his lands. George's brother, John, petitioned the Court to strike the Wester-Mailing of Easter-Queenslie from the estate sale, given the disposition held by him. The other creditors of George Hamilton objected to this petition, arguing that Hamilton's disposition, being in fact a security, did not endow him with preferable ranking. Furthermore, they argued that because Hamilton had received a confirmation of his interest only in 1776, after the ranking of the sale had begun, his confirmation was null and void. To this John Hamilton responded that regardless of the details of his disposition, "at all events he has security on the lands, and it is a matter of no great importance to him whether he be considered as real proprietor under the [aforesaid] personal obligation, or a preferable creditor." Handwritten marginalia indicates that the Court repelled the objections.
Henry Peirse and Others v. Mrs Elizabeth Ross	1791	Adjudication, Conveyance, Infeftment, Security, Heritor, Reduction	Mrs Elizabeth Ross defended her adjudication of multiple Ayrshire lands against objections by Henry Peirse and others, asserting her right as heir and the validity of her Crown charter in response to their claims of prior or superior rights. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Henry Pierce, and his Attorney v. David Limond	1791	Creditor, Adjudication, Disposition, Infeftment, Seisin, Ranking of Creditors	Henry Pierce and other creditors of Hugh Ross of Kerse contended against David Limond that their adjudication ranked as the first effectual by infeftment against the lands of Breckonhill. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Heritors of Kirkcudbright v. Birtwhistle	1790	Teinds, Adjudication, Disposition, Prescription, Heritor, Tack	The Heritors of Kirkcudbright sought to establish a scheme of locality for the lands of Balmae against William Birtwhistle, who claimed the teinds of those lands and objected to the proposed arrangement. They petitioned the Court to repel Birtwhistle's objection after Lord Monboddo pronounced an interlocutor adverse to their scheme, and Birtwhistle answered while maintaining his claim to the teinds. Birtwhistle later petitioned to alter the Court's subsequent interlocutor, and the Heritors, represented by the Earl of Selkirk, answered to resist his teind claim and defend the locality scheme.
High v. Main	1788	Election contest, Election, Oath, Corporation, Adjudication, Voting rights	Thomas High and Robert Main contested the deaconship of the Kinghorn Weavers' Incorporation, Main having petitioned to alter the council's decision admitting High to the office in his place. The central question was whether town-servants under the magistrates held voting rights in such elections, with the complainers citing precedents from Inverkeithing, Cupar, Perth, and Haddington to support their position. James Donaldson and others raised parallel challenges to the election of the deacon of the bakers, and the parties submitted answers and petitions seeking alteration of the Court's interlocutors.
Inhabitants of the Parish of Crailing v. Hunter	1791	Prescription, Heritor, Adjudication, Inhibition, Aliment, Thirlage	The inhabitants of the Parish of Crailing petitioned as pursuers in May 1791 to overturn a recent interlocutor against the defender Mr. Hunter, citing ancestral burial rights and a 1763 Sheriff judgment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Jack and Others v. Murdoch, Fearns and Company	1795	Insurance, Bill of Exchange, Adjudication, Debt, Sequestration, Oath	Digitization and description in progress.
James Farquharson v. Alexander Keay	1799	Creditor, Debt, Infeftment, Adjudication, Feu, Succession	James Farquharson pursued Alexander Keay regarding the lands of Wester Kinloch, asserting a pre-emption right under the feudal charter against the vassal’s sale to third parties. Farquharson sought to strike out or clog Keay’s claim as an onerous creditor proceeding in diligence against the estate of Thomas Mitchell, challenging the validity of the sale and prior decrees as res judicata. Keay defended his position as a bona fide onerous creditor entitled to proceed against the estate notwithstanding Farquharson’s pre-emption claim, while Farquharson petitioned the Court to remit its prior interlocutor on the binding effect of the charter’s irritant clause.
James Lockhart v. John Cathcart	1832	Lease, Rent, Valuation, Possession, Adjudication, Debt	James Lockhart, as pursuer, presented a reclaiming note asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against John Cathcart, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
James Waddel v. John Brown	1794	Tack, Lease, Possession, Succession, Adjudication, Disposition	James Waddel pursued John Brown concerning a lease of burgage subjects, seeking to determine whether such a lease bound a singular successor under the Act of 1449 without regard to the purchaser's knowledge. Waddel, by his agent Robert Craigie, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor and either grant decree in terms of the libel or ordain Brown to answer facts and produce correspondence. Brown responded by information, arguing that a lease of burgage subjects was binding against a singular successor under the 1449 Act regardless of whether the purchaser had notice of it.
John Miller, &c. v. Mrs A. Moodie or Anderson	1829	Creditor, Disposition, Succession, Liferent, Adjudication, Interlocutor	John Miller, William Roy, and William Thomson raised an action against Mrs Amelia Moodie or Anderson to compel her to complete a valid title and grant discharge of a heritable bond previously assigned to her. The defender denied that she was bound to make up titles to her children's heirs for the discharge of the bond, and subsequently submitted a reclaiming note seeking recall of the interlocutor and her assoilziement. The litigation concluded when William Harley, tutor-at-law for John Anderson, minuted that the pupil had no interest in the bond and consented to the completion of title at the defender's expense.
John Watson v. Sarah Marshall and Others	1781	Creditor, Adjudication, Debt, Succession, Inhibition, Prescription	John Watson, trustee for the creditors of David Ireland, petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor, asserting that his claim founded upon a 1733 inhibition and Jean Crookshanks’s overt intromission gave him priority over competing creditors. The creditors of James Alcorn, including Sarah Marshall, opposed the petition, disputing Watson’s title and ranking while raising objections of prescription, usury, and the validity of a bond of corroboration obtained under interdiction. Watson subsequently defended David Ireland’s adjudication against Marshall’s claim, maintaining his superior creditor rank and the retroactive validity of Jean Cruickshanks’s ruling.
Landale v. Carmichael, et al	1792	Debt, Adjudication, Interest, Teinds, Creditor, Security	David Landale, surgeon in Leven, sought to reduce decrees of adjudication and expiry of the legal granted against his uncle Thomas Landale, arguing that the claims contained pluris petitio and had been extinguished by intromissions made within the legal period. After Edward McCormick petitioned to alter an interlocutor, Landale renewed his challenge in 1794 on grounds of pluris petitio, informality, and extinguishment, prompting the defenders to file duplies confined to factual allegations. Landale subsequently maintained that adjudication being an articulate diligence, a pluris petitio in one article did not invalidate the entire decree.
Leggat v. Inner-House Interlocutor	1787	Debt, Sequestration, Adjudication, Rent, Power of Attorney, Tack	David Leggat petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor, raising the question of whether the Court should modify its prior order. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Macadam v. Creditors of Campbell and Company	1787	Creditor, Ranking of Creditors, Penalty, Adjudication, Debt, Infeftment	John Macadam of Craigingillan petitioned the Court to alter Lord Alva's interlocutor, which had restricted his right to rank for penalty in his heritable bond against Campbell and Company. The heritable creditors of the firm answered, opposing his claim for penalty beyond the expenses of recovery.
Macausland and Others v. Montgomery and Others, and the Magistrates of Glasgow	1792	Aliment, Advocation, Teinds, Adjudication, Interdict, Interlocutor	John MacAusland and James Burns, for themselves and in behalf of the other members of the Convenery or Trades-House in Glasgow, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. James Montgomery and others answered, contending that the petition had been given in the name of, but without the authority of, the Deacon-Convener, Collector and Trades-House of Glasgow.
MacEwan v Thompson	1793	Debt, Succession, Creditor, Trustee, Adjudication, Disposition
Macwhinnie v. Burton	1795	Debt, Creditor, Adjudication, Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Trustee	Andrew M'Whinnie, common agent in the ranking of the creditors of Alexander Hooks, petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor reducing his adjudication in totum on the ground of pluris petitio. Alexander Burton defended his interest against M'Whinnie's objections regarding pluris petitio and trustee status, submitting replies and information arguing that the reduction was justified by M'Whinnie's improper conduct and concealment of payments rather than by innocent mistake.
Mair v. Harries, et al	1789	Succession, Aliment, Debt, Tack, Adjudication, Multiple-Poinding	Betty Mair petitioned the Court against Lord Monboddo's interlocutors, asserting that under a mutual agreement with her deceased husband Peter Harries she held exclusive right to his effects and a bond. Daniel, William, and Isabel Harries, the deceased's next of kin, answered the petition, contesting the widow's claim to the estate.
Marjoribanks and Ramsay v. Spottiswoods	1795	Tack, Adjudication, Heritor, Lease, Possession, Removing	Marjoribanks and Ramsay raised an action to remove Spottiswoods from Hallyards farm after the lease expired, alleging that the defenders refused to vacate despite implied notice and prior conduct indicating an intent to leave. The defenders maintained that no lawful intimation had been given forty days prior to Whitsunday as required by the tack. The litigation turned on whether the statutory or conventional notice period for removal had been satisfied.
Mead v. Swinton	1796	Succession, Terce, Possession, Sequestration, Interlocutor, Adjudication	Lady Hannay claimed that as a widow she was entitled to the worst of two mansion-houses on the estate of Kirkdale as an appendage to her terce. The common agent maintained that she had no claim to a second mansion-house over and above her terce.
Murray and Creditors vs. Blair and Creditors	1793	Bankruptcy, Ranking of Creditors, Debt, Creditor, Sequestration, Adjudication
Oliphant and Husband v. Oliphant	1792	Succession, Aliment, Adjudication, Sequestration, Debt, Creditor	Oliphant and Husband petitioned to void a bond granting full rent to two sisters, arguing that it unfairly excluded younger children and exceeded the tailzie’s authority. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Purdie v. Lord Swinton's Interlocutor	1788	Debt, Aliment, Succession, Adjudication, Interest, Rents	Thomas Purdie petitioned the Court to alter Lord Swinton's recent interlocutor entered against him and to find that no expenses were due. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Riddell v. Hope	1796	Lease, Tack, Rent, Possession, Adjudication, Interlocutor	Sir James Riddell pursued Robert Hope, petitioning the Court to find the defender not entitled to damages and to remit the cause to the Sheriff simpliciter. Hope subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor.
Robson v. Robson	1793	Succession, Disposition, Sasine, Aliment, Heir, Adjudication	George Robson petitioned the Court to overturn Lord Ankerville's interlocutor concerning their father's settlement, which had favored George over his elder brother James. James Robson answered, asserting that the father had exercised a reserved power to alter the settlement by granting an acre in Jedburgh to James as heir at law. George replied, contending that James was not entitled to the acre because the term "heir" in the settlement referred to the legal heir rather than the heir of investiture.
Ross v. Trustees of Hugh Ross	1792	Debt, Succession, Aliment, Creditor, Adjudication, Factor Loco Tutoris	John Hunter, Archibald Swinton, and David Limond, as trustees for Hugh Ross of Kerse and his creditors, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in the action brought by Ross against them. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.