1792–1795
DebtCreditorSuccessionRanking and SaleRanking of CreditorsAdjudicationWilliam Graham, as heir of entail of the Hourston estate, challenged the claims of Harry Graham’s creditors, maintaining that their debts were invalid by reason of post-entail timing and defective adjudications. He further alleged that the common agent Mr Young had violated his duty to defend all parties equally by improperly using the common fund to support objections to the claims while simultaneously answering them.AI-generated
Documents in this case (2)
- William Graham v. The Creditors of Harry Graham — ObjectionsWilliam Graham, heir of entail, objects to creditors’ claims against entailed Hourston estate, arguing debts are invalid due to post-entail timing and defective adjudications.
- William Graham v. The Creditors of Harry Graham — Minutes, 1 Dec 1792December 1, 1792 Minute of Decanus for William Graham, heir of entail of Hourston, arguing that the common agent Mr Young improperly supports objections out of the common fund while also answering them, violating his du…
People & places in this case
People involved
- Alexander Young, W.S., of Harburn — Advocate for Party
- John MacLaurin, Lord Dreghorn — Lord Ordinary
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 15439
