1792–1793
John Hamilton of Barns pursued Sir William Cunningham of Robertland, Baronet, and William Campbell of Fairfield, as representatives of the deceased Sir William Cunningham and William Campbell, together with William Ballantyne and James Hunter, for debts which the defenders contended were barred by prescription. Hamilton petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against an Inner-House interlocutor, and after the defenders answered, a report maintained that the defenders' books showed debts still owing despite the prescription plea. Hamilton subsequently answered the defenders' petition maintaining that his claims remained valid.AI-generated
Documents in this case (5)
- Hamilton — Petition, 28 Feb 1792February 28, 1792 Petition of John Hamilton asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against an Inner-House interlocutor
- John Hamilton v. Sir William Cunningham of Robertland and William Campbell of Fairfield — Answers, 12 Apr 1792April 12, 1792 Answers by Sir William Cunningham of Robertland, Bart. and William Campbell of Fairfield, as representing the late Sir William Cunningham and William Campbell, to the petition of John Hamilton, Esq; of Ba…
- John Hamilton of Barns v. The Representatives of Sir William Cunningham of Robertland, Baronet, William Campbell of Fairfield, and William Ballantyne and James Hunter — Report, 5 Mar 1793March 5, 1793 Report in the process, John Hamilton of Barns, against the representatives of Sir William Cunningham, William Campbell, and William Ballantyne and James Hunter, arguing that the defenders' books show debts…
- Cunningham — Petition, 27 Jun 1793June 27, 1793 Petition of Sir William Cunningham and William Campbell asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
- Sir William Cunninghame and William Campbell v. John Hamilton — Answers, 5 Sep 1793September 5, 1793 Answers by John Hamilton to the petition of Sir William Cunninghame and others, responding to the argument that his claims are barred by prescription.
People & places in this case
People involved
- James Hunter, Merchant in Ayr — Named in case documents
- James Hunter and Company — Named in case documents
