Legal Subject: Debt

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
A. Keltie v. R. Wilson	1827	Debt, Poinding, Sist, Inhibition, Diligence, Arrestment	Andrew Keltie of Gelvan petitioned the Court against Robert Wilson, writer in Edinburgh, seeking relief from an illegal poinding executed in violation of a court-ordered stay. Keltie alleged that Wilson had poinded during a sist on a bill of suspension, breaching procedural protections and amounting to contempt of court. The litigation proceeded from an initial petition for redress to a Revised Case arguing that such poinding during suspension constituted contempt.
Air v. Johnston	1786	Debt, Bankruptcy, Fraud, Creditor, Disposition, Infeftment	William Air, merchant in Coldstream and trustee for the creditors of Robert Johnston, baker and feuar there, petitioned to alter the Lord Ordinary’s interlocutor, citing that a heritable bond held by Thomas Johnston of Templehall was invalid under the Act of 1696. Johnston answered, defending his heritable security against the trustee’s claim that it was liable to be set aside.
Alexander Bennet v. David Maxwell	1787	Tack, Arrestment, Debt, Lease, Rent, Sasine	Alexander Bennet, as pursuer, challenged a tenant’s missive as invalid for lacking formality or stamp, and David Maxwell, as defender, responded asserting the missive’s validity under pacta esse servanda. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Alexander Bruce v. The Representatives of John Stein	1792	Succession, Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Tack, Cautioner	Alexander Bruce pursued the representatives of John Stein for a debt arising from a 1770 bond involving Robert Stein, with trustees and spouses' portions also forming part of the dispute. The defenders resisted the action, leading Bruce and his trustee Alexander Abercromby to argue that the defenders, as representatives of the deceased John Stein, remained liable for the bond obligation.
Alexander Dick Junior v. William Richardson	1838	Prescription, Interlocutor, Agent, Witness, Debt, Process	Alexander Dick Junior sought suspension of a Glasgow magistrates' decree enforcing payment of £26:15:2 against him, alleging procedural and evidentiary flaws in the underlying action and disputing the law account charges, including a contested item dated April 1830. The litigation proceeded with challenges regarding procedural irregularities in proof, culminating in the Court's rejection of pleas of prescription and incompetence of bill, upholding the account as valid and awarding expenses against Dick as suspender. Dick subsequently petitioned to suspend William Richardson concerning disputed authorship and possession of legal documents arising from prior Richardson & Porter cases.
Alexander Irvine of Drum v. The Earl of Aberdeen, &c	1772	Debt, Estate	The estate of Alexander Irvine of Drum was heavily burdened with debts at the time of his death. The estate went through a series of family members. Through this process, some debts were relieved but others were added. The estate was sold in 1736 to cover the debts. A small part of the estate was set aside for the Irvine family, but most of the estate went to the Earl of Aberdeen or Patrick Duff of Premnay. After John Irvine of Drum's death in 1737, the successor to the estate, Alexander Irvine of Crimond, mounted a legal challenge to the settlement of the estate. The pursuer in the present case was Alexander Irvine of Drum, grandson of Alexander Irvine of Drum. The 3rd Earl of Aberdeen, taking up a cause inherited from his father, and Patrick Duff argued that the Irvine family has no valid claims against them.
Alexander Pagan and James Hunter v. Alexander Wylie	1792	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Suspension, Aliment, Fraud	Alexander Pagan and James Hunter, as suspenders, resisted Alexander Wylie’s claim upon a bill of exchange that had been altered from £8 to £84 after execution. Wylie, agent for the Paisley Union Bank, had discounted the bill for the higher amount and argued that the suspenders remained liable for the altered sum, while Pagan and Hunter maintained that such a material change precluded any charge against the original acceptor and indorser. The litigation centered on whether parties to a bill could be held responsible for a sum materially increased after the instrument had been signed.
Alexander v. Lord Monboddo's Interlocutor	1787	Prescription, Interlocutor, Libel, Debt, Parole Evidence, Oath of Party	Pursuer James Alexander petitioned the Court of Session to alter Lord Monboddo's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Alexander-Charles Maitland, & Others v. Dame Helen Maitland Gibson, & Spouse	1830	Compensation, Security, Succession, Debt, Tailzie, Entail	Alexander-Charles Maitland and other heirs of entail pursued Dame Helen Maitland Gibson and her spouse regarding £7000 paid by a canal company for consent to route a canal through the entailed estate. The pursuers sought to have the sum paid into a bank for lawful investment under the 1827 Act, asserting it was compensation for permanent damage belonging to the entail, while the defenders answered that it represented merely the value of the land and payment for temporary inconvenience. The court found that the defenders must compensate the heirs for the permanent damage sustained by the estate from the canal deviation, with the compensation to be paid from the £7000 received for the consent.
Anderson v. Creditors of Arnot	1792	Arrestment, Trustee, Creditor, Multiple-Poinding, Assignation, Debt	Lilias Anderson, as pursuer, petitioned against an interlocutor issued by Lord Dregborn in her case against the creditors of Arnot. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Attorney of Thomas Cullen & Co v. David Philp	1792	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Contract, Employment, Pactum Illicitum	The attorney of Thomas Cullen and Company opposed David Philp, merchant in Boarhills, who as suspender pleaded that no action could lie upon bills alleged to have arisen from a smuggling transaction in which the pursuers were principals or accessories. The attorney replied that this plea of non-action for smuggled goods was unjust and unsupported by law or fact.
Baines v. Turnbull	1794	Debt, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Interest, Factor	Baines, the suspender, argued against Turnbull that he was not liable for bills dishonoured through no fault of his own. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Belch [Belsh] v. Wilson and Son	1788	Arrestment, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Debt, Sequestration	Peter Belsh, a merchant in Stirling, charged William Wilson and Son, merchants in Bannockburn, over a discounted bill involving indorsers. Wilson and Son suspended the charge and subsequently submitted an information contending that their subscription to the promissory note was a forgery and therefore void.
Belchier v. Palmer	1776	Debt, Estate	In 1759, William Belchier purchased the estate of Grange in Scotland. Belchier died without children, leaving his estate to his older brother, John Belchier, in liferent and to his nephew, James-William Belchier, in fee. Several creditors of the decedent William Belchier brought actions of constitution and adjudication against his estate. Defenders Charlton Palmer and William Walker, creditors of William Belchier, sought a sale of William Belchier's estate and a ranking of the creditors. (The defenders mistakenly brought the action only against the liferenter, John Belchier, but later amended the action to include the apparent heir, James-William Belchier.) To expedite the process and reserve some of the estate for themselves, the pursuers also brought an action for the sale and ranking of the estate. This led to a dispute concerning which action—the creditors' or the apparent heirs'—should proceed.
Benjamin Greig v. John Scott	1829	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Disposition, Sasine, Sale	Benjamin Greig, as pursuer, sought declarator, multiplepoinding, and exoneration against defender John Scott with respect to lands conveyed under bond to secure a £3000 debt, following unsuccessful sale attempts and disputes regarding title. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Black v. Allason	1788	Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Disposition, Reduction, Sasine	William Black, carrier and portioner in Falkirk and pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against defender Allason. 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.
Bowden and Gibson v. Esten and Bennett	1794	Contract, Parole Evidence, Debt, Arbitration, Defamation, Aliment	Bowden and Gibson, as pursuers, maintained that the pursuer was entitled to his salary for eighteen nights under his engagement with Mrs. Esten, despite Esten and Bennett's refusal to allow him to perform as agreed. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Braimer v. Innes and Lothian	1788	Aliment, Debt, Succession, Interdiction, Trustee, Trust	John Braimer, late of Edrom, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Stonefield's interlocutor, which maintained Braimer's interdiction and declared the trustees not bound to pay over the balance. Gilbert Innes of Stow and John Lothian, merchant in Edinburgh, as defenders, answered the petition, resisting Braimer's claim for reversion and discharge of the interdiction.
Bromfield v. Paterson et al	1786	Succession, Debt, Liferent, Entail, Tailzie, Infeftment	Stephen Bromfield pursued Mary Paterson, Alexander Campbell, and Henry Campbell regarding the estate of Eccles, contending that the defenders were bound by an entail and could not claim the lands without limitations. The defenders argued that the entail of 1743 and its 1755 amendment bound the succession to the barony of Eccles and lands of Stow, and further maintained that a deed of 1758 continued the prior entail, citing the precedent in Lowrie v. Spalding.
Brown v. Brown	1787	Succession, Aliment, Heirship Moveables, Debt, Trust, Heritor	Jean Brown petitioned to alter an interlocutor that had ordered her to return a gold watch and gowns to Janet Brown, relict of George Baird, contending that the items were not marital property. Janet Brown answered, defending her claims of inheritance and possession of the heirship-moveables in dispute.
Burt v. Lord Justice Clerk's Interlocutor	1789	Succession, Aliment, Debt, Creditor, Sequestration, Defamation	Robert Burt petitioned the Court of Session to alter an interlocutor that the Court had pronounced against the Lord Justice Clerk. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Cairns v. Common Agent in Ranking of Newlaw	1791	Debt, Interest, Bankruptcy, Sale, Cautioner, Agent	Thomas Cairns of Dundrenan, Esquire, petitioned the Court against the Common Agent in Ranking of Newlaw. He sought exoneration from the price of lots 1st and 7th of the estate of the deceased David Currie and delivery up of the bond.
Campbell v. Easterby	1797	Arrestment, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Reduction, Interlocutor	James Campbell petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor regarding an arrested vessel, and George Easterby answered, arguing that Campbell’s bond of caution did not conform to the Admiral’s interlocutor and that the arrestment had caused no diminution in the ship’s value. The dispute thus turned on the sufficiency of the security offered and the effect of the seizure upon the vessel’s valuation.
Campbell v. Irvine	1794	Aliment, Marriage, Creditor, Succession, Debt, Interlocutor
Campbell v. Laidlaw	1796	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration, Partnership, Interlocutor	Robert Campbell, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor suspending his charge for a bill of exchange he had accepted without value in the action against Laidlaw, the defender. Robert Corbet thereafter informed the Court that the bill had been accepted for the accommodation of Archibald M'Ausland rather than Milligan and Co.
Campbell v. Monboddo's Interlocuter	1793	Succession, Debt, Aliment, Reversion, Entail, Trustees	James Campbell petitioned against Lord Monboddo's interlocutor, asking the Court to alter the ruling that the reversion of the estate's sale price must be laid out upon lands. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Campbells v. Macneil	1798	Debt, Prescription, Execution, Bankruptcy, Oath, Citation	Colin Campbell and Duncan Campbell junior, as trustees on the sequestrated estate of Alexander M'Corquodale, pursued John Macneil of Gigha to alter an interlocutor of Lord Armadale regarding an account libelled against him. Macneil answered, pleading that the account was prescribed and the execution false. The parties thereafter debated the proper interpretation of Macneil's oath and the validity of the citation.
Chalmers v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor	1798	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Trustees, Expenses, Tack	Thomas Chalmers petitioned the Court to overturn an interlocutor issued by Lord Stonefield. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
Children of Macneil v. Reps. of Campbell, et al	1793	Succession, Wadset, Aliment, Arrestment, Debt, Creditor
College of Glasgow v. Selkirk, Miller, and Stirling	1793	Feu duties, Debt, Tack, Teinds, Factor, Intromission	The College of Glasgow petitioned against Selkirk, Miller, and Stirling, challenging a June 1792 interlocutor that limited overpayment offsets to cautionary branches and arguing for proportional application across all revenue branches. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Competition Among the Creditors of Macfarlane	1766	Debt, Arrestment, Shipping	This case was a dispute among the creditors of David Macfarlane, a merchant of St. Christophers (St. Kitts). In 1764, Macfarlane sent a shipment of sugar from St. Croix to Port Glasgow, consigning it to James King. Macfarlane instructed King to sell the sugar and apply the proceeds to pay certain of Macfarlane’s creditors, who were set forth in a list. When the sugar arrived in Scotland, however, some of Macfarlane’s creditors sought an arrestment. This led to a competition among Macfarlane’s creditors. In the course of the proceeding, the Lord Ordinary ruled that the consigned sugar could not be arrested, and a group of joint petitioners sought review. In August 1766, the Court of Session ruled against them. In November 1766, Messrs. Greenshiels and Wardrope petitioned the court again, this time on their own, arguing that they should be treated differently from other creditors because they did not receive notice of the shipment. In December 1766 the Court adhered to its earlier interlocutor.
Corse, et al v Kibble	1793	Copartnership, Contract, Sale, Debt, Dissolution, Partnership	James Kibble, defender in an action raised by Robert Corse, John Black, James Buchanan, and Archibald Buchanan, petitioned to alter the court’s interlocutor, arguing that a resolution of 11 July binding the partners to dissolve their firm at Candlemas 1793 violated the partnership’s unanimity clause. Corse and his co-pursuers answered, maintaining that Kibble acted against his own interest and sought injurious terms.
Coventry v. Lord Hailes' Interlocutor	1787	Succession, Legacy, Liferent, Aliment, Testament, Debt	Robert Coventry presented a petition challenging an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Hailes. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Crawfords v. Russell, et al	1789	Succession, Aliment, Trustee, Debt, Arrestment, Disposition	Agnes and Margaret Crawfurds, as pursuers, argued that they were absolute fiars during their lives and that their children were heirs to the sums bequeathed in fee. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Creditors for William Hunter v. David Armstrong and William Johnstone	1778	Bankruptcy, Creditor, Debt, Aliment, Fraud, Arrestment	Creditors of the bankrupt William Hunter, joined by His Majesty’s Advocate, pursued David Armstrong, advocate, and William Johnstone, writer to the signet, as art and part guilty of Hunter’s fraudulent bankruptcy and the concealment of his effects following Hunter’s flight from Scotland in 1777. The pursuers alleged that the defenders had assisted in secret transactions and the hiding of assets to the prejudice of creditors, while Armstrong and Johnston denied complicity, maintaining they had acted on counsel and in good faith. The litigation proceeded through mutual condescendences, answers denying fraud, and repeated petitions and reclaiming petitions concerning the relevancy of proof and the Court’s interlocutors.
Creditors of Currie v. Geddes	1793	Debt, Creditor, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Trustee, Trustees	The creditors of Currie, represented by their common agent in the sale and ranking of the Estate of Newlaw, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Swinton’s interlocutor. The respondents contested the creditors’ attempt to rank debts against Currie’s estate, citing partial payments and post-prescription markings as evidence of debt continuity.
Creditors of David Currie v. William Hannay	1791	Debt, Penalty, Damages, Creditor, Contract, Forfeiture	The creditors of David Currie pursued William Hannay regarding whether articles of roup imposed a binding obligation. Hannay petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor, and John Currie, as eldest son and apparent heir of David Currie, and Hugh Corrie, Writer to the Signet, answered, maintaining that the articles created no binding obligation.
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 Fergusson v. Swinton	1795	Creditor, Debt, Succession, Aliment, Feu duties, Property	Hugh Ferguson, David Steuart, and other creditors of Walter Ferguson pursued an action against Mrs Catharine Swinton, his spouse, to set aside her marital settlements as fraudulent preferences prejudicial to their claims against the insolvent estate. They challenged the postnuptial contract granting her an annuity and provisions as voidable for preference. Mrs Swinton, represented by Alexander Keith as her curator ad litem, defended the deed as fair, onerous, and legally valid, resisting reduction.
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 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.
Creditors of Newlands v. Mackenzie	1792	Creditor, Debt, Proof, Arrestment, Reduction, Bill of Exchange	Andrew Mackenzie petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor requiring him to produce title-deeds before receiving payment of his account. The creditors of Newlands answered that Mackenzie ought to be paid without producing the writings.
Crosby and Attorney v. Maidment	1798	Debt, Aliment, Creditor, Assignment, Usury, Interest
Cunningham & Co. v. Craigie	1789	Insurance, Arrestment, Deviation, Creditor, Debt, Prize	William Cunningham and Company, merchants in Glasgow, pursued Laurence Craigie and other insurers to overturn Lord Dreghorn's interlocutor that assoilzied the defenders, seeking recovery under a 1783 policy. The defenders answered that the policy was void for concealment of a voyage to Charlestown carrying British troops and for material alteration of the terms from a voyage to St Thomas. The pursuers subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor, while the respondents denied any knowing intent to deviate to Charlestown and maintained that the policy covered only the voyage to St Thomas with a convoy call serving as a risk-reducing clause.
Cunningham and Simpson v. Sir George Home, Baronet, and the Commissioners for raising Seamen at the Port of Leith	1795	Debt, Arrestment, Statute, Common Law, Contract, Jurisdiction	Cunningham and Simpson petitioned the Court to alter the interlocutor of Lord Dreghorn, Ordinary on the bills, which had refused a bill of suspension in the matter of apprentices Dowie, Stewart, and Drysdale. They subsequently sought suspension of the judgment and interdict against Sir George Home, Baronet, and the Commissioners for raising Seamen at the Port of Leith, and their officers, regarding the levying and carrying away of apprentices Dowie and Stewart.
Cunningham and Simpson v. Walker and Smith	1799	Expenses, Common debt, Debt, Debtors	Case originated with debt due by the bankrupt fugitive Walter McFarlane, stabler in the Canongate, to Cunningham and Simpson. Other Creditors, but not including Cunningham and Simpson gathered and decided to have Walker and Smith auction off Mcfarlane's assets. Cunningham and Simpson challenged the right of Walker and Smith to claim the goods in order to pay off creditors. Cunningham and Simpson succeeded in claiming expenses from Walker and Smith.
Curtis, et al. v. Chippendale	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Compensation, Bill of Exchange	William Curtis, Ebenezer Maitland, and John Newman Caussmaker petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor regarding Edward Chippendale's claim as trustee on the sequestrated estate of William Macalpin and Company. The parties disputed whether Scottish law on compensation ought to be altered to conform to English practice, with the respondent defending the established Scottish doctrine and the petitioners arguing that Chippendale's claim was not well founded under that law.
David and Henry Lillie v. Mrs. Lillie or Smith, and Others	1832	Succession, Debt, Creditor, Legacy, Disposition, Aliment	David and Henry Lillie pursued Mrs. Lillie or Smith and others to prove the tenor of a holograph letter written by Miss Margaret Seton that their sister Catherine Lillie had destroyed, asserting that the letter directed legacies to them. The defenders denied that the letter contained any such bequests in favor of the pursuers. The pursuers lodged a revised condescendence and note of pleas in law, the defenders answered, and the pursuers subsequently led proof regarding the contents of the destroyed letter.