1785–1786
FactorAgentDebtDamagesBargainAlimentThis case was about a contract dispute. The defenders, Samuel Macclone Jr. and Samuel Macclone Sr., lived on the farm of Ross. The pursuer, John Beck, alleged that Samuel Jr. had agreed to sell him the farm’s entire output of oats. The Macclones responded that Samuel Jr. had no authority to make the bargain on behalf of his father, who was the sole tenant, and that Beck had known this when he allegedly entered into the transaction.
Documents in this case (4)
- Beck v. M'Clone — Petition, 3 Feb 1785February 3, 1785 Petition of the petitioner asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against Samuel M'Clone junior and his father
- John Beck v. Samuel Maclone junior — Answers, 24 Feb 1785February 24, 1785 Answers by Samuel Maclone junior to the petition of the pursuer, asserting that the petitioner acted mala fide in purchasing oats from him knowing his father was the sole tackman and he had no authorit…
- Beck v. M'Clone — Petition, 20 Jul 1786July 20, 1786 Petition of William Craig asking the Court to alter its interlocutor that found Samuel M'Clone, senior, entitled to expences
- John Beck v. James and Samuel Macclones — Answers, 3 Aug 1786August 3, 1786 Memorial of Samuel Macclone and James Macclone, arguing that the Lord Ordinary erred in awarding expenses against them and in finding their father entitled to expenses
People & places in this case
People involved
- John Beck — Pursuer
- Samuel Macclone Jr. — Defender
- James Macclone — Defender
- Samuel Macclone Sr. — Defender
- William Craig, Lord Craig — Advocate for Pursuer
- Edward Armstrong — Advocate for Defender
- Alexander Gordon, Lord Rockville — Lord Ordinary
- David Dalrymple, of Westhall, Lord Westhall — Lord Ordinary
