| 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. |
| Bruce v. Davidson |
1791
|
Valuation, Feu duties, Sasine, Process, Security, Property |
Colonel Andrew Bruce, pursuer, led proof by James Ferrier, writer to the signet, against defender Harry Davidson to the effect that the proof should proceed as agreed by both parties and commissioners. 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. |
| 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. |
| Hill v. Swinton |
1796
|
Contract, Security, Deed, Breach of Contract, Debt, Copyright |
Peter Hill, bookseller in Edinburgh, sought to relinquish his interest in the copyright of a book he had contracted to publish with John Swinton, Advocate. Swinton maintained that Hill remained bound by the agreement to accept delivery of sixty copies annually until all four hundred and eighty-six remaining copies were delivered. The pleadings set forth the parties' competing positions on the enforceability of the publication contract and the disposition of the unsold stock. |
| James Fisher v. Donald Maclachlan |
1769
|
Sale, Security |
This case was about the interpretation of documents relating to a land transaction. Lachlan Maclachlan of Innis Chonnell, an ancestor of defender Donald Maclachlan, was arrested on account of his debt to Dougal Campbell of Edderline. Lachlan sought help from Duncan Fisher, the father of pursuer James Fisher, and the parties agreed to a three-part transaction. First, Duncan executed a bond of presentation attesting that he would present Duncan at a specified time and place or pay the debt to Campbell, plus a penalty. Second, Lachlan executed a minute of sale in which he agreed to transfer his lands to Duncan. Finally, in a note of depositation, Duncan and Lachlan agreed that if Lachlan paid his debt on the specified day, the minute of sale would become null and void. Lachlan did not present himself or pay the debt, and the minute of sale was registered in the sheriff court. For many years, Fisher and his heirs failed to obtain possession of the land, but pursuer James Fisher eventually raised an action for that purpose. In litigation, the parties disputed the nature of the transaction. James contended that the original parties had intended a true sale of the lands. However, defender Donald Maclachlan argued that the land transfer was merely a security, and that he could retain the lands by paying off the original debt. |
| John Melville v. TheCreditors of George Smiton |
1794
|
Infeftment, Liferent, Succession, Ranking of Creditors, Security, Conveyance |
John Melville petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor that had held void the infeftment in favor of George Gordon's heirs, opposing the creditors of George Smiton. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| 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. |
| Lee Allen and Andrew Elder v. Elder and Others |
1832
|
Poinding, Expenses, Interlocutor, Advocation, Sheriff, Security |
John Lee Allen, Esq., and Andrew Elder presented a reclaiming note asking the Court of Session to alter Lord Medwyn's interlocutor in their action against Elder and others. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| Petrie v. Lord Ankerville's Interlocutor |
1789
|
Debt, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Rent, Security |
Pursuer Joseph Petrie petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in his dispute with defender Lord Ankerville. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| Scott v. Stonefield's Interlocutor |
1793
|
Interlocutor, Caution, Possession, Suspension, Security |
|
| The Trustees for the Creditors of John Brough v. The Heirs of Robert Selby |
1794
|
Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Security, Cautioner, Sequestration |
The Trustees for the Creditors of John Brough pursued the Heirs of Robert Selby regarding the extent of security afforded by a heritable bond of relief granted by Brough in 1783. The Trustees contended that the bond secured the sum drawn at the date of seisin notwithstanding subsequent fluctuations in the cash account. The Heirs maintained that the bond subsisted only to the extent of the limited sum until the cash account was closed and the infeftment renounced. |
| Wilson and Corse v. Woods |
1797
|
Debt, Letter of Credit, Security, Bill of Exchange, Creditor, Succession |
Wilson and Corse, as pursuers, sued John Woods for breach of a guarantee letter he had written to authorize credit to the foreign buyer Gray. They argued that Woods’s liability extended beyond fifty casks under trade practice and the statute defining cask sizes. Woods responded by memorial, contending that his letter to Gray was merely an inquiry with conditional security rather than an unqualified mandate or obligation of cautionry. |
