Legal Subject: Forgery

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
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.
Brown v. Dundas 1793 Adjudication, Statute, Fraud, Forfeiture, Penalty, Forgery Dundas, as defender, argued in an information that the statute under which Brown prosecuted them did not authorize the seizure of unstamped starch without prior notice or opportunity to comply. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Campbell v. Stein 1786 Bribery, Corruption, Forgery, Common Law, Debt, Statute This case was about a criminal charge of bribery. Distiller James Stein allegedly gave a package containing £500 to a Solicitor of Excise. Stein was prosecuted for attempted bribery. In response, he argued that the charged offense did not constitute a crime at common law. Additionally, Stein argued that the prosecution’s indictment was insufficient to support the charge, because it did not contain any facts demonstrating a corrupt intention.
Frank and his Tutor v. Frank, et al. 1793 Witness, Succession, Reduction, Aliment, Deed, Forgery Frank and his Tutor sought to reduce a disposition granted by the deceased Charles Frank in February 1791 in favor of the defenders. The defenders argued that the instrumentary witnesses to the deed were incompetent to depose whether they saw the party subscribe, while the pursuers challenged the competency of Janet Smith, a witness for the defenders, on the ground that her annuity depended upon the validity of the deed, and petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor refusing to admit her. The pursuers subsequently presented a formal petition for reduction and annulment of the disposition.
Gentle and Gentle v. Belch 1787 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction Robert Gentle and William Gentle, as pursuers, argued against defender Belch that thirteen bills of exchange bearing their names were forged and void. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Rankine and Son v. Belch 1790 Creditor, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction, Promissory note Defender Peter Belch argued that the indorsement by Rankine and Son was genuine and that he held no material interest in the matter, as he would recover value from David Mitchell, who had received full value. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Turnbull v. Proudfoot 1795 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Arrestment John Hagart, appearing for the respondent Proudfoot, argued that Proudfoot was under no legal obligation to answer letters and therefore should be assoilzied in the action brought by Turnbull. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.

Documents discussing this subject (50)