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
Lockhart v. Douglas 1792 Tack, Teinds, Contract, Stipend, Aliment, Succession Sir James Lockhart of Lee pursued the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon regarding teinds in Stonehouse, claiming entitlement under a 1673 contract and arguing that the Duke’s right had expired in 1751. The Duke maintained that Lockhart could claim no additional teind-bolls beyond those settled in the 1673 contract. Lockhart subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its prior interlocutor concerning the allocation of teind bolls and augmentation burdens under that agreement.
Loughborough v. Inner-House Interlocutor 1789 Arrestment, Succession, Creditor, Aliment, Tack, Teinds Loughborough petitioned against an Inner-House interlocutor that dismissed arrestments on Crombie estate rents, contending that a secret agreement among creditors unjustly excluded the petitioners under jure mariti. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lydia Douglas, and her Husband v. The Trustees of Sir Charles Douglas 1791 Succession, Aliment, Marriage, Trust, Disposition, Mala Fides Lydia Mariana Douglas and her husband pursued the Trustees of Sir Charles Douglas, arguing that a condition in her father's will was void as capricious and unjust. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
M'Leod v. Incorporation of Bakers 1784 Tack, Thirlage, Possession, Aliment, Tax, Charter Malcolm M'Leod, tackman of the ladle-dues, pursued the Incorporation of Bakers of Glasgow for payment of ladle-dues on wheat and flour, including grain ground at the Partick mills. After M'Leod proved that such dues applied to all wheat entering Glasgow including that ground at Partick, the Bakers petitioned to alter the interlocutor and claimed immunity, whereupon M'Leod answered and produced a 1693 decree-arbitral between the Town and the Bakers. Following remits from the Lord Ordinary, the Bakers argued that the Magistrates had no right to levy dues on grain brought to Partick without entering the city, while the Magistrates maintained their entitlement to levy on such grain.
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.
Macdonald v. Macarthur 1791 Debt, Succession, Executor, Aliment, Next of Kin, Heritor D. Macdonald, as executor qua nearest of kin, argued that he held a clear right to recover from Captain Neil Macarthur the balance of a debt due to the estate. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
MacLaggan v. Heritors of Melrose 1780 Aliment, Heritor, Reduction, Glebe, Suspension, Interlocutor Digitization in Progress
Maclauchlan and Campbell v. Campbell and Macnicol 1794 Aliment, Debt, Succession, Prescription, Intromission, Factor Grace Campbell, co-heiress and creditor under her father's marriage-contract, and Maclauchlan pursued the representatives of the late Colin Campbell of Ballinaby for count and reckoning. The defenders petitioned to be assoilzied from the action, and Maclauchlan sought alteration of a recent interlocutor. The pursuers subsequently argued that a tutor who failed to make inventories was not entitled to plead decennial prescription.
Magistrates and Councellors of the Burgh of Dunfermline v. Wilson, et al 1786 Debt, Arrestment, Election contest, Creditor, Aliment, Diligence The Magistrates and Councellors of the Burgh of Dunfermline, as defenders, filed answers to the petition of Thomas Wardlaw and others, responding to claims of electoral corruption. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
Martin and Ker v. Robertsons 1792 Debt, Prescription, Statute, Statute of limitations, Creditor, Aliment Martin and Ker pursued a debt claim against Robert Robertson, a minor, and his tutors, who defended by asserting that prescription barred the action under the 1579 statute, requiring the creditors to prove the debt and its unpaid status beyond three years. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
McFarlane v. Meadowbank's Interlocutor 1796 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Oath The suspender McFarlane petitioned against an interlocutor of Lord Meadowbank, which had found the charger entitled to expenses and appointed an account thereof to be given in. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
McKenzie v. Buchanan and Company 1792 Arrestment, Debt, Contract, Aliment, Employment, Action Daniel M'Kenzie, a spinner, pursued James and Archibald Buchanans and Company, his masters, contending that they had unlawfully deducted from his wages without contractual authority. The Buchanans subsequently petitioned the Court to overturn an inner-house interlocutor that had been pronounced against them.
Merry v. Macrae 1791 Arrestment, Aliment, Defamation, Proof, Inhibition, Mala Fides James Merry pursued James Macrae for assault with a stick, claiming damages and a fine. Alexander Young, Writer to the Signet, subsequently lodged an information contending that Merry's claim was unfounded and urging that the interlocutor against Macrae not be enforced.
Michael M'Culloch v. William Allen 1791 Presbytery, Jurisdiction, Appeal, Heritor, Aliment, Statute The Reverend Mr M'Culloch pursued William Allan, schoolmaster of Bothwell, regarding a Synod sentence that had found Allan unqualified for his office. Allan petitioned the Court to remit the sentence, and M'Culloch responded with information arguing that sentences of Presbyteries on schoolmasters were subject to review by superior ecclesiastical courts.
Miller v. Cathcart, et al 1798 Succession, Debt, Aliment, Creditor, Tack, Disposition
Minister of Lochgoilhead v. The Ministers of Inveraray 1791 Teinds, Stipend, Parish, Heritor, Augmentation, Aliment The minister of Lochgoilhead sued the ministers of Inveraray regarding the allocation of 38½ bolls of meal annually from the teinds of Glenshira lands, which the Lochgoilhead minister claimed were reserved for his stipend by a 1650 decree notwithstanding the lands’ annexation to Inveraray. Heritors including the Duke of Argyll and Lieutenant-General John Campbell petitioned the Court to revise the December 1790 interlocutor that had allocated the stipend to Lochgoilhead, seeking to avoid double payment and retroactive augmentation from 1787, while the Inveraray ministers likewise petitioned to alter the interlocutor in their favor. The Lochgoilhead minister replied that the annexation was only quoad sacra and did not discharge the lands from liability for his stipend, and the parties disputed whether any augmentation should run from the date of summons or the interlocutor.
Ministers of Marykirk v. King's College of Aberdeen 1792 Succession, Teinds, Aliment, Stipend, Ministers, Augmentation The Ministers of Marykirk pursued King's College of Aberdeen for augmentation of teinds, and the Principal and Professors of the College argued that the College held its teinds by ecclesiastical titles distinct from other titulars and not subject to augmentation claims by the parish minister. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Mitchell v. Douglas and Baillie 1 of 2 1796 Teinds, Stipend, Aliment, Valuation, Heritor, Statute Archibald Lord Douglas and Dame Elisabeth Baillie of Lamington, defenders, petitioned the Court to alter its 1793 interlocutor modifying the minister's stipend in victual. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Mitchell v. Society of Writers in Ayr 1798 Teind, Teinds, Stipend, Augmentation, Aliment, Interlocutor The Society of Writers in Ayr petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor imposing a share of the minister's augmented stipend upon their fishings, arguing that only vicarage-teind was due from such property and claiming abatement on account of a reduced boat count. Mitchell resisted, maintaining that customary payment and proportional liability attached to the fishings. The case concerned the proper extent of teind burden chargeable against the fishings and the validity of the proposed reduction.
Monro v. Sutherlands and Sutherland 1793 Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Rent, Aliment, Sequestration William Ross Monro pursued an action against the heirs of John Sutherland and Ann Ross regarding debts Monro had owed to his uncle. William Ross of Aldie submitted a memorial arguing that the Court should not revive the tenor of unproduced obligations without proof of a special casus amissionis. The respondents challenged a decree in the suit, maintaining that prescription and a prior settlement barred the claim.
Moray, et al. v. Scott 1795 Teinds, Stipend, Communion Elements, Jurisdiction, Aliment, Interlocutor Moray and his co-petitioners petitioned the Court to alter Lord Ankerville Ordinary's interlocutor allocating communion elements upon their lands, arguing that the allocation violated established law and the Court's own decree. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Morison v. Inner-House Interlocutor 1787 Aliment, Witness, Marriage, Succession, Interlocutor, Evidence Thomas Morison, a mariner in Charlestown, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor pronounced in a multiple poinding process initiated by naval officers and trustees. Mrs. Bethune Morison and others had reclaimed against Lord Moncreiff's interlocutor in that proceeding, and Thomas Morison sought alteration of the interlocutor the Inner House had issued upon their reclaiming note.
Mrs A. V. S. T. Anderson v. John Anderson 1827 Reduction, Tailzie, Entail, Succession, Aliment, Expenses Mrs A. V. S. T. Anderson, pursuer, lodged a reclaiming note against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Moncreiff in her action against John Anderson, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Mrs Anne Nielson, &c v. Austins 1766 Aliment, Debt This case involved a dispute over how much money a husband owed his wife's family in aliment so that the wife could live with her family and the marriage could remain secret. William Sloan (deceased) and Anne Nielson (the Pursuer) married in secret in 1752 when Nielson was only seventeen. At the time, Sloan was in divinity school and felt that the relationship would be perceived as inappropriate for a man of his upbringing and occupation. Once married, Sloan claimed that revealing his part in a secret or clandestine marriage would be equally fatal to his career. In 1754, he granted bond to Neilson's trustees, her brother and uncle, to pay an annual stipend to Nielson's family to cover her living expenses. During their marriage and until Sloan's death in 1765, Anne Nielson and William Sloan never lived together as husband and wife. Sloan lived and worked as a minister in Dunscore, while Nielson lived with her mother in Edinburgh. When the case came before the Court of Session in 1765, the Court ruled that Sloan, who had died in debt, could only have been expected to pay Anne Nielson what he could reasonably afford, and the Court reduced the yearly payment due to Anne Nielson from the amount claimed by her trustees. The Nielson family appealed this decision. Sloan's executors also argued that due to Nielson's silence about her marriage when Sloan was alive, Sloan's creditors had no knowledge of Sloan's financial obligations to his wife at the time they lent him money, and that her latent claims to aliment were now unjustly delaying repayment of debts due to Sloan's creditors.
Mrs. Crawford & Others v. Bennett 1823 Bankruptcy, Succession, Debt, Creditor, Trustee, Aliment Mrs. Margaret Crawford and others raised an action against William Bennett concerning funds held by him, petitioning the Court to ordain him to make up a scheme or cast of the funds in terms of the statute to enable them to consider their claims. Subsequently, the pursuers sought to have the cause remitted to multiplepoinding or to amend the record to permit a full hearing upon their claims.
Mrs. Henderson's Trustees v. J. Tulloch and D. Ross 1832 Succession, Disposition, Trustee, Assignation, Heritor, Aliment
Mrs. Jane Lowrey or Maxwell v. Colin Dunlop Donald and Dr King 1830 Trustee, Marriage, Succession, Debt, Aliment, Trust Mrs. Jane Lowrey or Maxwell sued Colin Dunlop Donald and Dr Benjamin Watts King, as trustees and executors of the late John Maxwell Esq., for a declarator that she was his lawful wife and relict, concluding for aliment. The defenders denied the marriage and asserted that the aliment conclusions were incompetent, while Mrs. Lowrey also objected to a petition seeking a curator bonis for her children, insisting upon their legitimacy. She subsequently reclaimed against an interlocutor, asking the Court to alter it and repel the defences of Donald and King.
Murdo Mackenzie of Ardross v. Thomas Houston of Creich 1829 Salmon Fishing, Interdict, Interlocutor, Res judicata, Possession, Aliment Documents available. Full description coming soon.
Nisbet v. Edgar 1794 Witness, Aliment, Succession, Creditor, Marriage, Onus Probandi Nisbet petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor allowing Mrs Hamilton of Pencaithland to be examined as a witness in the action to bastardize him. Edgar responded, arguing that Mrs Hamilton of Belhaven was admissible as a witness notwithstanding her daughter's patrimonial interest in the cause.
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.
Philips v. Buchanan 1797 Debt, Oath, Interlocutor, Partnership, Aliment, Suspension Pursuer John Phillips petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor reversing a ruling by Lord Armadale in his case against defender Buchanan. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Preston v. Wellwood 1791 Trust, Entail, Debt, Aliment, Succession, Lease Sir Charles Preston and the other trustees appointed by the deceased Robert Wellwood of Garvock sought suspension and interdict against Robert Wellwood, now of Garvock, to prevent him from cutting timber on the entailed estate. Wellwood answered, claiming he was entitled to cut timber on the estate notwithstanding the deeds of entail and trust executed by his father. The trustees maintained that they possessed the exclusive right to prevent the cutting of growing timber in order to preserve the value of the trust estate.
Principal Clerks of Session v. Charles Steuart 1788 Sequestration, Aliment, Succession, Creditor, Mala Fides, Arrestment The Principal Clerks of Session brought a penal action against Charles Steuart, as heir of the late John Steuart, seeking to hold him liable for his father’s neglect of duty in preserving extracted decreets and their warrants. Steuart argued that he ought to be assoilzied from the charge, while the pursuers maintained that he was bound as heir to indemnify them for the expenses and damages arising from his father’s failure.
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.
Ramsay, et al v. Smith 1798 Teinds, Stipend, Augmentation, Heritor, Aliment, Interlocutor John Ramsay, Alexander Anderson, John Niven, and Andrew Simpson, heritors of the parish of Bourtie, presented a second reclaiming petition asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. The Reverend William Smith answered the petition, and subsequently lodged duplies in which he also asked the Court to alter the interlocutor. The parties thus submitted successive pleadings regarding the alteration of the interlocutor.
Ramsays v. The Magistrates and Town-Council of Edinburgh 1792 Sequestration, Aliment, Trustees, Trust, Tax, Public Works John Ramsay pursued the Magistrates and Town-Council of Edinburgh, contending that the defenders were bound by statute to take three shops and pay their value or assess recompense. The defenders answered that the pursuer's claim for damages was incompetent and premature under the statute. The case turned on whether the statutory provisions obliged the town to acquire the shops and compensate the pursuer, and whether the remedy was properly raised.
Rebecca Hog v. Thomas Hog 1791 Succession, Jurisdiction, Legitim., Debt, Aliment, Collation Rebecca Hog pursued Thomas Hog of Newliston regarding an estate that included moveables situated in England, and Thomas answered that the Court might apply English law to those assets. After the Court pronounced an interlocutor, Thomas reclaimed and presented an additional petition, which Mrs Lashley and her husband answered by alleging that he had failed to comply with the order to furnish full states of the estate.
Remington, Crawford, and Company, and Others v. Mrs. and Miss Bruce and Sir Michael Bruce and Others 1824 Debt, Creditor, Succession, Reduction, Aliment, Expenses Remington, Crawford, and Company and other creditors pursued Mrs. Bruce, Miss Bruce, and Sir Michael Bruce to reduce an 1819 land disposition favoring the heirs, alleging it created unlawful preferences prejudicial to onerous debts. The defenders initially asserted that gratuitous provisions must be postponed to onerous creditors while seeking assoilziment, later maintaining that their securities derived from the free residue of the estate and were irreducible. The pursuers sought reduction of the mortis causa provisions while conceding the debtor's solvency, and argued that as onerous creditors they were entitled to preference over the gratuitous legatees.
Renfew alias Watt v. Campbell 1795 Lease, Tack, Rent, Aliment, Succession, Implied Obligation Katharine Renfrew, alias Watt, sought to suspend payment of rent to Sir James Campbell of Inverniel and to obtain an interdict restraining him from operating a new inn on his estate as a rival to her establishment. Campbell opposed the suspension, maintaining that Watt had no right to claim damages or abatement of rent for the new inn erected on his property.
Representatives of Laurie v. Bell 1797 Disposition, Succession, Sasine, Tack, Aliment, Heir The Representatives of Laurie, as suspender and holder of a four-fifths interest, sought suspension of a sale against Bell on the ground of a title defect affecting the share of the pupil Gilbert Laurie Finlay, son of the deceased Jean Laurie. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Riddell v. Grosset 1791 Tack, Reduction, Rent, Agent, Aliment, Damages Sir James Riddell petitioned the Court of Session to apply the judgment of the House of Lords reversing the interlocutor that assoilzied him from the process of reduction against Grosset. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Ritchie v. Lauder 1795 Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Aliment, Arrestment, Sequestration The pursuer Ritchie, in the interest of the creditors of Peter Logan, sought to set aside a preference granted to Colin Lauder, surgeon of the Sutherland Regiment of Fencibles, as fraudulent. Lauder petitioned the Court to remit the interlocutor of which he complained and to supersede extract until the following January. The creditors subsequently informed the Court that the preference was fraudulent and ought to be reduced.
Ritchie v. Patersons 1794 Succession, Aliment, Interlocutor, Liferent, Debt, Jus Relictæ Agnes Ritchie pursued the Patersons for one-fifth of her grandfather John Paterson’s moveable estate under his settlement, seeking to claim the share notwithstanding her mother’s predecease. The defenders maintained that she was entitled only to one-fifth of the dead’s part of the estate rather than one-fifth of the whole personal estate.
Robb v. Trustee 1793 Succession, Aliment, Creditor, Trustee, Debt, Sequestration Mrs. Agnes Robb sought aliment from the sequestrated estate of her husband William Robb, pleading that she had brought a pre-marital fortune to the marriage, had been deserted by her insolvent husband, and had suffered improper sale of her property. Walter Ewing MacLae, trustee of the estate, answered her petition, whereupon Mrs. Robb replied correcting factual errors and insisting upon her right to retain the annual produce of her estate for her aliment. She subsequently petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor.
Robertson and Farquharson v. Cameron, et al 1786 Arrestment, Aliment, Sequestration, Creditor, Defamation, Damages The defenders Daniel Cameron, Joseph Fyfe, James Boyd, and Thomas Miller filed an information arguing that the pursuers Robertson and Farquharson were unlawfully detained in prison after being apprehended for attempted robbery. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Robertson v. Inner-House Interlocutor 1797 Aliment, Divorce, Terce, Marriage, Infeftment, Inhibition William Henry Ralston, defender in the action brought by Robertson, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor issued by Lord Swinton. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
Rose v. Lord Cullen's Interlocutor 1801 Debt, Bargain, Aliment, Tack, Contract, Factor The Right Hon. James Earl of Fife answered the petition of William Rose, late his factor, responding to allegations of breach of trust and confidential disclosure. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.