AI-transcribed

Alimony of a wife, or maintenance of a child or imprisoned debtor. (See Act of Grace.)

Definition source
Kinnear, J. B., Digest of House of Lords Cases Decided on Appeal from Scotland, 1709-1864 — Glossary of Scottish Law Terms (Edinburgh, 1865). Public domain.
Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
Forbes, Hunter, and Company v. Edinburgh Life Assurance Company 1829 Insurance, Contract, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Representation, Aliment Sir William Forbes, James Hunter, and Company, bankers, raised an action against the Edinburgh Life Assurance Company to recover £3000 sterling payable under a policy of assurance. The defenders resisted payment, asserting that the policy was void due to misrepresentation and the non-statement of material facts at the time of effecting the insurance. The cause subsequently proceeded to a Bill of Exceptions for the defenders.
Fotheringham and Hume v. Ogilvie and Others 1795 Succession, Debt, Aliment, Liferent, Disposition, Creditor William Fotheringham and Hume pursued claims to the Balfour estate against Ogilvie and others, petitioning the Court in 1795 and again in 1797 to alter interlocutors respecting the succession. The respondents defended these interlocutors, maintaining that under a marriage contract the estate had vested in fee-simple in the second son, who predeceased his parents, thereby excluding the pursuers' claims as heirs. The litigation turned on whether the second son's fee-simple right to the Balfour estate took precedence over the pursuers' asserted rights in the Powrie succession.
Frank and his Tutor v. Frank, et al. 1793 Witness, Succession, Reduction, Aliment, Deed, Forgery Frank and his Tutor sought to reduce a disposition granted by the deceased Charles Frank in February 1791 in favor of the defenders. The defenders argued that the instrumentary witnesses to the deed were incompetent to depose whether they saw the party subscribe, while the pursuers challenged the competency of Janet Smith, a witness for the defenders, on the ground that her annuity depended upon the validity of the deed, and petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor refusing to admit her. The pursuers subsequently presented a formal petition for reduction and annulment of the disposition.
Gardiner, et al v. Andrews 1788 Debt, Aliment, Tack, Lease, Rent, Fraud Robert Gardiner, with the concurrence of Ebenezer Marshall and George Arnot, pursued Robert Andrew to have declared void a lease granted by Gardiner to Andrew, alleging that Gardiner had acted under incapacity and that the defender had procured the tack by fraud. Andrew defended the action, maintaining that the lease had been granted freely and voluntarily without undue practice or fraudulent conduct. The litigation proceeded upon competing memorials addressing the validity of the lease and the questions of Gardiner's capacity and Andrew's alleged fraud.
Gardner v. Corporation of Goldsmiths in Edinburgh 1792 Tax, Debt, Corporation, Aliment, Interlocutor, Statute Alexander Gardner and David Downie, goldsmiths in Edinburgh, pursued the Corporation of Goldsmiths regarding the incorporation’s resolution to abolish the marking-money tax and its appropriation of marking money for private use. The Corporation defended its actions by citing the opulence of its funds and historical precedent for tax abrogation, while the pursuers contended that the assay office marking fees constituted wages rather than assessments and that the corporation bore no liability for such expense. The litigation proceeded through mutual petitions to alter interlocutors and answers exchanging these respective positions.
General Greme's Trustees v. Thomas Bruce 1799 Aliment, Thirlage, Trustees, Arbitration, Succession, Sale Thomas Bruce pursued General Greme's Trustees to void his purchase of the Braco estate, alleging the trustees had concealed a material alteration to the course of Keir Burn that diminished the property's value and safety. The trustees denied withholding information and argued that any damage was compensable and insufficient to annul the bargain. Bruce additionally sought authority to alter the burn's course, prompting disputes over jurisdiction and damages, while technical reports assessed flooding risks and construction costs.
Gentle and Gentle v. Belch 1787 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction Robert Gentle and William Gentle, as pursuers, argued against defender Belch that thirteen bills of exchange bearing their names were forged and void. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Gentle v. Heritors of Crieff 1792 Debt, Heritor, Aliment, Contract, Arrestment, Interlocutor James Gentle, writer in Edinburgh, pursued the Heritors of Crieff for exoneration from a bond of caution and relief from expenses arising from a church contract, contending that unpaid shares and material cost increases since 1778 rendered the Heritors liable for the losses. The Heritors answered that the loss was Gentle's own, and the cause proceeded through replies and duplies disputing the contractual responsibility. William Lumsdain separately petitioned for remit of answer expenses and delivery of his bond of caution, and after the Heritors petitioned to alter an Inner-house interlocutor, Gentle responded reaffirming his claim for exoneration based on the church cost claims.
George and Wilsons v. Wilson 1789 Succession, Tack, Aliment, Lease, Trustee, Interest George, David, and Mary Wilsons, children of the deceased George Wilson, answered the petition of James Wilson concerning Foulden-Newton, maintaining that the petitioner's claims were without foundation and that the case had been fully determined. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
George Binnie v. Neil M'Millan 1831 Aliment, Debt, Arrestment, Security George Binnie, mariner in Greenock, served as suspender against Niel M'Millan, grocer in Cartsdyke, reclaiming against Lord Mackenzie's interlocutor which found that no expenses were due to the suspender. M'Millan argued in response that Binnie was not entitled to aliment because he had refused to sign an obligation for peace. The litigation turned on whether a suspender who declined to give security for the peace could recover expenses or maintain a claim for aliment.
George Gordon and Alexander Stewart v. Alexander Lawrence 1832 Contract, Debt, Tack, Teinds, Aliment, Expenses George Gordon and Alexander Stewart pursued Alexander Lawrence, a slater in Keith, regarding disputes over slate supply, pricing, and carriage. Lawrence reclaimed against the interlocutor of Lord Corehouse, and the parties lodged a mutual appendix detailing their competing claims concerning the slate transactions.
George Taylor v. Mrs. Taylor, or Binnie 1831 Aliment, Divorce, Adultery, Libel, Proof, Agent George Taylor, as pursuer in a divorce action against Mrs. Taylor, or Binnie, reclaimed against Lord Newton's interlocutors and requested that the Court recall them. The Court resolved to obtain the opinions of the judges on whether proof of remissio was prejudicial and should precede proof of the adultery. The consulted judges returned answers to the questions posed by the Lords of the First Division regarding the plea of remissio in the divorce action.
George v. Christie 1788 Sequestration, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Aliment George sought restitution of barley he had delivered to Alexander Dewar, an insolvent debtor who was actively seeking sequestration, alleging that Dewar had acted in mala fide. William Christie, a Stirling merchant, petitioned to alter the court’s interlocutor, asserting that his bill for the barley equated to cash and that he stood as a common creditor. The creditors of Dewar’s sequestrated estate answered Christie’s condescendence, contending that the grain had been fraudulently delivered to the bankrupt.
Gibson v. Reid 1795 Debt, Succession, Aliment, Entail, Terce, Tailzie The respondent Gibson answered the petition of Christian Kerr Reid, contending that the petitioner’s condescendence underestimated the free rents of Hofelaw and failed to account for equitable relief for the widow. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Gloag v. Thomson and Others 1793 Debt, Usury, Bill of Exchange, Interest, Aliment, Creditor Gloag petitioned the Court of Session to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor, which had assoilzied Thomson and the other defenders from an action for repayment of a £50 counter-bill. He subsequently petitioned again to alter the Court's subsequent interlocutor in the same cause. The representatives of James Thomson argued that the £50 bill was valid and that a prior bill for £107 10s had been paid.
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.
Graham v. E of Hopetoun. 1796 Succession, Aliment, Debt, Teinds, Creditor, Rent Lady Christian Graham, Sir Richard Bempde Johnstone, and Charles Johnstone pursued James Hope Johnstone, Earl of Hopetoun, regarding whether expenditures made by the Earl as legal curator of the Marquis of Annandale's estate affected rights of succession to Scots funds. The pursuers argued that the curator's payments did not impair succession rights, while the Earl maintained he was entitled to credit for his administrative expenditures and petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. The pursuers subsequently answered the petition, responding to the seventh article concerning management charges.
Gray v. Methven's Interlocutor 1795 Aliment, Prescription, Creditor, Debt, Succession, Interlocutor William Chambers petitioned the Court to remit the sheriff's interlocutor that held him liable for the aliment and expenses of Jean Wightman's child. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Greig v. Johnston 1782 Aliment, Proof Helen Greig sued Archibald Johnston for maintenance of a child alleged to be his. Johnston argued that Greig had already discharged her maintenance claim as part of a settlement agreement. Greig denied having discharged the claim, and challenged the evidence offered by Johnson.
Halliday v. Craig's Interlocutor 1793 Tack, Interlocutor, Lease, Aliment, Succession, Heritor William Robertson petitioned the Court on behalf of Halliday to alter Lord Craig’s recent interlocutor against Messrs Riddell and Mr Davidson. The respondents opposed the removal petition, arguing that the lease allowed Ravenscroft to retake possession at Whitsunday after majority with nine months’ notice.
Hamilton v. Scott 1797 Jurisdiction, Aliment, Interlocutor, Arrestment, Debt, Libel The Reverend John Scott petitioned against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Methven. Thomas Hamilton, Treasurer for the Poor of Avondale, answered the petition, asserting that the justices of the peace had jurisdiction and that the decree was regular.
Hawkins and Bruce v. Hamilton 1789 Succession, Debt, Trust, Executor, Aliment, Reduction Hawkins and Bruce raised an action against Archibald Hamilton, writer in Hamilton, as executor, seeking to hold him liable for his intromissions with the testator's estate. The defender argued that he was not liable for intromissions made beyond his lawful authority under the will. After an Inner-House interlocutor found him liable for his intromissions with the pursuers' funds, he presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court to alter that finding.
Helen Fergus or M'Leish, and Husband v. Isobel Fergus or Izat, and Husband 1830 Debt, Succession, Aliment, Trust, Disposition, Liferent Helen Fergus or M'Leish and her husband John M'Leish pursued Isobel Fergus or Izat and her husband John Izat for exhibition of debts and payment from the estate of James Fergus. The defenders counterclaimed that prior payments they had made for M'Leish's debts exceeded the £300 legacy and half of the moveable estate due to them, leaving a balance of £60 1 3 owed by the pursuers. The pursuers maintained the validity of an 1814 settlement and denied allegations of preferential treatment, while the defenders subsequently reclaimed against an interlocutor of the court.
Henderson v. Inner-House Interlocutor 1789 Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Aliment, Trustee, Interlocutor Michael Henderson petitioned the Court of Session to alter a recent interlocutor issued by the Inner House. He presented an initial petition in March 1789, and subsequently presented a reclaiming petition in July 1789. The dispute concerned the Court's authority to review and modify its own prior interlocutory order.
Henderson v. Wilson and Melvilles 1795 Succession, Deed, Will, Entail, Aliment, Tailzie Robert Henderson pursued a claim against George Wilson regarding the succession to Walter Bowman’s estate, while Catharine and Christian Melvilles argued that a 1763 entail was ineffectual and had revoked an earlier 1757 deed, thereby opening the succession to heirs ab intestato. Henderson petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor, and Wilson answered both Henderson’s petition and the Melvilles’ memorial, contesting their respective positions on the disputed entailments.
Hepburn and Massow v. Duff and Davidson 1793 Prescription, Tack, Aliment, Thirlage, tenant, Sasine Robert William Duff and his tenant John Donaldson, defenders in the action by Hepburn and Massow, petitioned against Lord Monboddo's interlocutors. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Heritors of Bourtie v. Minister of Bourtie 1798 Teinds, Stipend, Aliment, Augmentation, Heritor, Interlocutor The heritors of Bourtie petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor augmenting the stipend of their minister, the Rev. William Smith, contending that the sum awarded was excessive. Smith answered, defending the augmentation, and subsequently lodged duplies also requesting alteration of the interlocutor.
His Majesty's Advocate v. Muir 1797 Libel, Verdict, homicide, Arrestment, Aliment, Trial Thomas Muir, soldier in the 65th Regiment of Foot and defender, argued that he could not be convicted of culpable homicide if indicted only for murder. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hunter v. Roxburgh 1794 Tack, Teinds, Lease, Aliment, Heritor, Interlocutor The pursuer Hunter petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor, seeking a finding that he was entitled to the ipsa corpora of the vicarage-teinds specified in his libel, or alternatively requesting letters of incident diligence for further evidence. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Inglis v. Lord Dreghorn's Interlocutor 1789 Aliment, Oath, Arrestment, Creditor, Advocation, Sequestration John Inglis petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Inglis v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor 1789 Fraud, Contract, Damages, Aliment, Interlocutor, Proof William Inglis presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court of Session to alter its interlocutor on damages for non-implementation of a bear-delivery agreement with Lord Stonefield. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
J. and P. Duguid and Others v. W. Duguid and Others 1823 Succession, Aliment, Creditor, Trustees, Proof, Marriage The children of John Duguid claimed a share in William Duguid’s estate against the trustees, who had sought exoneration after distributing legacies while residuary beneficiaries remained unidentified, filing a condescendence that opposed the executors’ objections to their evidence. The claimants’ entitlement required proof of John Duguid’s life, death, and family in America, leading to the granting of commissions for taking evidence abroad, which the respondents moved to recall or restrict to major American cities while seeking permission to participate. Proof was subsequently taken abroad regarding John Duguid’s circumstances and the claimants’ right to the estate.
James Henderson v. William Scott 1792 Arrestment, Sequestration, Aliment, Interlocutor, Jurisdiction, Damages James Henderson raised an action against William Scott, alleging that the defender had unlawfully detained his property and imprisoned him without warrant. Scott, acting in his capacity as Procurator-Fiscal, laid an information contending that the defender had acted unlawfully in detaining a ring found in Berwick.
James Lee v. The Executors of Robert Watson 1794 Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Aliment, Sequestration, Succession James Lee pursued the executors of Robert Watson for payment of a deed of provision he had purchased at public roup from the creditors of a bankrupt. Jean Watson petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor and remit the claim against her for the unpaid moiety of her provision, and the executors separately petitioned for alteration of the same interlocutor. Lee argued that retention of the provision for Mrs. Lumsdain’s aliment was not competent against the creditors of her bankrupt husband.
James Stewart v. Alexander Scot 1830 Cautioner, Factor, Creditor, Intromission, Aliment, Mandate James Stewart, as pursuer, submitted a revised case against Alexander Scot, the defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Jamieson, et al v. Andrew, et al 1786 Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Aliment, Factor John Jamieson and other creditors of Gavin Kempt petitioned the Court to overturn the election of James Campbell as interim factor, alleging that James Kempt’s creditor claim—which supported his vote in that election—was fraudulent and self-serving. George Andrew, as factor for Henry Greig, James Kempt, and other creditors of Gavin Kempt, answered the petition, defending the validity of Kempt’s vote.
Janet Barber v. John Caddell 1789 Rent, Possession, Aliment, Tack, Lease, Proof Janet Barber, relict of James Renny, pursued John Caddell of Cockenzie in a suspension bill alleging he had unlawfully sold her crop and seized her land without authority. Caddell petitioned the Court to remit the suspension, asserting claims of possession and rent arrears against her. Barber answered, defending her suspension and responding to Caddell’s allegations regarding possession and arrears.
Janet Calder v. John Wood 1798 Citation, Interlocutor, Aliment, Arrestment, Mala Fides, Witness John Wood, defender, sought review of interlocutors rejecting his advocation bill in an action brought by Janet Calder, contending that the citation had been defective because it was left at a lodging house he no longer occupied. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Janet Kyle and Her Trustees v. William Allan, Adam White and Others 1816 Reduction, Trustee, Debt, Creditor, Succession, Aliment Janet Kyle (also called Jessie Kyle) and her Trustees brought a summons of reduction against Adam White and other defenders, seeking to set aside the contract of April 20, 1811. White lodged preliminary and substantive defences denying the validity of the reduction and asserting that he was a bona fide purchaser of the rights in question. The cause proceeded to an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Mackenzie, against which the pursuers reclaimed.
John Finlay and Others v. John Newbigging and Others 1792 Debt, Aliment, Corporation, Reduction, Succession, Election contest John Finlay and other weavers petitioned the Court to overturn Lord Ankerville’s interlocutor, alleging that reformers within the Incorporation of Weavers in Lanark had illegally excluded them and misused funds in violation of the by-laws. John Newbigging and other members answered, maintaining that the respondents possessed no right to expel members for non-payment of assessments.
John Minto and John Gavin v. John Kirkpatrick 1831 Succession, Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Liferent, Tack John Minto and John Gavin pursued John Kirkpatrick for a decree compelling exhibition of title-deeds and accounts relating to Margaret Sime's inheritance and annuity rights. They reclaimed against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Medwyn.
John Smith v. Marion Wilson, and Others 1791 Succession, Aliment, Heirship Moveables, Heritor, Sasine, Recompence John Smith petitioned the Court of Session to alter an interlocutor pronounced by the Lord Justice Clerk regarding a garden at Muirend. Marion Wilson, wife of Robert Mann, and others answered, asserting that the garden was not a præcipuum and thus not entitled to exclusive claim by the eldest sister. The litigation turned on whether the property constituted a præcipuum subject to the eldest sister's exclusive right.
John Wilson and Others v. James Scott and Others 1792 Debt, Aliment, Corporation, Charter, Succession, Interlocutor John Wilson and others pursued James Scott, late Deacon, and other members of the Incorporation of Hammermen in Glasgow, contending that the defenders had unlawfully applied £20 from the corporation's funds to burgh reform. The defenders maintained that the Incorporation possessed legal power to apply its funds for public reform purposes. After the pursuers noted the financial history and assessment of the corporation, the defenders petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor.
Jowett, et al v. Wooley & Maidment 1797 Debt, Arrestment, Sequestration, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Aliment Wooley and Maidment, as respondents, contested the debt-related arrest and flight charge brought by Jowett and his co-petitioners, claiming their detention was unlawful despite multiple warrants and asserting that they lacked fugitive status after forty days abroad. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lamb, et al v. Duncan 1797 Debt, Creditor, Cessio Bonorum, Aliment, Diligence, Assignation James Lamb, John Robertson, and Alexander Orr petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Glenlee, and James Duncan answered the petition. The dispute concerned whether the Court would vary the prior order, with the petitioners seeking alteration and Duncan resisting the application.
Lamont v. Ewing 1792 Arrestment, Debt, Jurisdiction, Theft, Sequestration, Aliment Thomas Ewing, defender, petitioned the Court to overturn the interlocutor of the Lord Justice-Clerk, which found the water-bailie of Glasgow competent to hear the pursuer Lamont’s civil action for stolen goods. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lauder v. Gibson 1793 Lease, Tack, Interdict, Possession, Aliment, Interlocutor Dr. Colin Lauder pursued William Gibson regarding the use of a road, having obtained an interdict against Gibson. Gibson answered that the road was necessary for his farm and that the interdict caused him patrimonial loss, whereupon Lauder petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutors against suspension of the interdict. Gibson responded that the road had been historically used by his predecessors and was not excluded by the terms of his lease.
Lawson v. Macculloch 1797 Aliment, Debt, Interlocutor, Contract, Contract of separation, Creditor David Macculloch petitioned the Court to remit Lord Craig's interlocutor, which found him liable to his wife, Lawson, for expenses and denied her claim to a larger aliment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Loch v. Tweedie 1798 Arrestment, Aliment, Trespass, Poinding, Interlocutor, Penalty John Loch pursued Alexander Tweedie regarding damages caused by Tweedie’s trespassing sheep, defending his poinding of the flocks and asserting statutory rights to distrain while disputing the defender’s allegations as to penalties and damages. Tweedie repeatedly petitioned the Court to alter interlocutors, first regarding Lord Craig’s order and later challenging subsequent decisions, while Loch reclaimed against an Inner House interlocutor and submitted defenses supported by witness testimony. Tweedie answered Loch’s reclaiming petition and continued to seek alteration of the Court’s interlocutors through November 1799.