Interlocutor

Any decree or judgment of a Court.

Definition source

Kinnear, J. B., Digest of House of Lords Cases Decided on Appeal from Scotland, 1709-1864 — Glossary of Scottish Law Terms (Edinburgh, 1865). Public domain.

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
Hay Marshall v. Anderson	1797	Divorce, Witness, Interlocutor	Thomas Hay Marshall (pursuer) brought an action of divorce against Rose Anderson (defender), his Wife. for adultery.
Hay v. Thomson	1787	Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Assignation, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy	John Hay, trustee for the creditors of D. Loch, petitioned the Court of Session to alter Lord Rockville’s interlocutor, arguing that a 1770 assignation was void as a fraudulent preference under the 1696 Act because it was intimated after bankruptcy and constituted a fraud against Loch’s other creditors. James Thomson and the creditors of St Clair & Co. answered, contesting the validity of the translation and assignation under the statute. Hay petitioned again to alter the court’s interlocutor, maintaining that the assignation was an illegal preference.
Henderson v. Inner-House Interlocutor	1789	Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Aliment, Trustee, Interlocutor	Michael Henderson petitioned the Court of Session to alter a recent interlocutor issued by the Inner House. He presented an initial petition in March 1789, and subsequently presented a reclaiming petition in July 1789. The dispute concerned the Court's authority to review and modify its own prior interlocutory order.
Heritors of Ardnamurchan v. Campbell	1796	Teinds, Stipend, Heritor, Augmentation, Interlocutor, Tack	The Heritors of Ardnamurchan, represented by Sir James Riddell, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor concerning the stipend of the Reverend Alexander Campbell, alleging that the allowance was excessive and improperly distributed. Campbell answered, defending the stipend against these claims.
Heritors of Bourtie v. Minister of Bourtie	1798	Teinds, Stipend, Aliment, Augmentation, Heritor, Interlocutor	The heritors of Bourtie petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor augmenting the stipend of their minister, the Rev. William Smith, contending that the sum awarded was excessive. Smith answered, defending the augmentation, and subsequently lodged duplies also requesting alteration of the interlocutor.
Hill v. Abercromby	1793	Defamation, Advocation, Counsel, Interlocutor, Liferent, Jurisdiction	Robert Hill, tailor in Potterrow, pursued Charles Abercromby, writer in Edinburgh, asking the Court to remit a protestation taken out by Abercromby after the summons was called and appearance entered, and to inflict censure for malpractice. Hill presented replies to Abercromby’s answers, disputing the respondent’s conduct in filing the protestation at that procedural stage.
His Majesty's Advocate v. Lilburn and Buchanan	1771	Trial, homicide, pannels, Interlocutor	On September 29, 1770, Lilburn and Buchanan passed by the bridge of Boquhan when a mastiff or bull dog attacked them. They threw rocks at the dog. Sejeant Robertson came to the bridge to get the dog and Joseph Martine came to assist him. Lilburn and Buchanan struck Joseph Martine, who died the next day. They were arraigned for trial, and admitted attacking Martine, but the Court ruled that the two men could not be guilty of homicide because twelve hours passed between the attack and Martine's death. Had help been gotten, Martine might have lived.
Home v. Smart	1795	Interlocutor, Mala Fides, Damages, Arbitration, Impress Service, Arrestment	Sir George Home, Baronet, Commander of HMS Defiance, sought review of an interlocutor that found him liable for damages for impressing John Smart, chief mate of the Brig Molly of Leith, who claimed exemption under merchant vessel practice and had been cleared of a desertion allegation. Smart answered, contending that the impressment was unlawful and based on a false pretence of desertion. Home subsequently reclaimed against the Inner-House interlocutor, seeking to alter the finding that he was liable in expenses.
Hon. Mrs Maria Hay Mackenzie and Hugh Munro v. Magistrates of Dingwall and Others	1832	Sequestration, Possession, Tack, Expenses, Interlocutor, Res judicata	Mrs. Maria Hay Mackenzie and Hugh Munro petitioned the Court for interim execution pending their appeal against the interlocutor of 11th July 1832 in their action against the Magistrates of Dingwall and others. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hotchkis v. Royal Bank of Scotland	1796	Debt, Bankruptcy, Valuation, Sequestration, Trustee, Interlocutor	William Simpson, Cashier to the defender Royal Bank of Scotland, petitioned the Court in the action brought by pursuer Hotchkis to order the trustee to value securities held by the Bank and to give the option prescribed by statute. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Houston v. Hunter and Edmund	1782	Bill (Financial Instrument), Witness, Bill of Exchange, Interlocutor, Libel, Debt	This case was about liability for a bill, and the manner in which that liability could be proved. For reasons that were disputed, defenders Thomas Hunter and James Edmund became drawers on a bill that was accepted by pursuer John Houston. The bill was then discounted at a bank to raise money for one James Osburn. At the same time, a back-bill from Osburn and his business partner was placed in the hands of Edmund. Houston alleged that he, Hunter, and Edumund had agreed to take on joint liability for the bill he accepted; Hunter and Edmund denied this. Additionally, Hunter and Edmund challenged the propriety of examining Osburn as a witness, on the ground that he was too closely connected with Houston.
Huggan v. Gray	1794	Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy, Arrestment, Debt	Huggan petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against the suspender George Jardine and to find the letters orderly proceeded. Gray responded, arguing that Huggan lacked proper title to proceed in diligence and that no due notification of dishonour had been made to him.
Hugh Montgomery v. Strang, Lennox and Company	1798	Decreet-Arbitral, Tack, Arbitration, Usury, Reduction, Interlocutor	Strang, Lennox and Company, cotton-spinners in Eaglesham, petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor respecting their claim for damages against Hugh Montgomery of Bogstown, suspender, arising from a prior loan and arbitration dispute. Montgomery submitted answers opposing the chargers' application.
Hunter v. Roxburgh	1794	Tack, Teinds, Lease, Aliment, Heritor, Interlocutor	The pursuer Hunter petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor, seeking a finding that he was entitled to the ipsa corpora of the vicarage-teinds specified in his libel, or alternatively requesting letters of incident diligence for further evidence. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Incorporated trades of Aberdeen v. The Magistrates, Council, & Guildry of Aberdeen	1793	Decreet-Arbitral, Foreign Trade, Trade, Interlocutor, Statute, Monopoly
Inglis v. Bethune	1798	Cautioner, Debt, Assignation, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy, Action	William Inglis petitioned to reverse a court’s finding that defender William Bethune’s 1786 holograph bond was mere corroboration rather than new security, seeking to hold Bethune jointly liable for half the debt. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Inglis v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor	1789	Fraud, Contract, Damages, Aliment, Interlocutor, Proof	William Inglis presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court of Session to alter its interlocutor on damages for non-implementation of a bear-delivery agreement with Lord Stonefield. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Isabel Howie, Martha Buik, and the Kirk-Session of Alyth v. The Kirk-Sessions of Arbroath and St Vigean's	1799	Aliment, Statute, Interlocutor, Thirlage, Estate Settlement, Heritor	This case was about how to determine which parish should pay for the maintenance of an impoverished child. The child, Anne Coathill, was born in Arbroath, but she and her parents, James Coathill and Janet Buik, soon moved to St Vigeans. After Janet died, Anne was sent to live with relatives in Alyth, including pursuers Martha Buik and Isabel Howie. Joined by the Kirk-session of Alyth, these relatives sought maintenance from the parishes of Arbroath and St Vigeans. Case documents include several depositions.
James Ayton v. James Bruce	1785	Aliment, Lease, Succession, Tack, Interlocutor, tenant	James Ayton of Kippo leased his mill to James Bruce, along with the right to mill grain produced on surrounding properties that were possessed by tenants. While the lease to Bruce was still in effect, Ayton took back the land that had been leased to tenants and stopped taking that land’s produce to the mill. Bruce claimed that he should receive a corresponding abatement of his rent.
James Henderson v. William Scott	1792	Arrestment, Sequestration, Aliment, Interlocutor, Jurisdiction, Damages	James Henderson raised an action against William Scott, alleging that the defender had unlawfully detained his property and imprisoned him without warrant. Scott, acting in his capacity as Procurator-Fiscal, laid an information contending that the defender had acted unlawfully in detaining a ring found in Berwick.
James Russel v. James Fairie	1791	Debt, Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Interlocutor, Statute of limitations, Oath	Documents uploaded. Full description in progress.
Janet Calder v. John Wood	1798	Citation, Interlocutor, Aliment, Arrestment, Mala Fides, Witness	John Wood, defender, sought review of interlocutors rejecting his advocation bill in an action brought by Janet Calder, contending that the citation had been defective because it was left at a lodging house he no longer occupied. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Jean Coalston, Pursuer v. Archibald Stewart, Merchant in Queensferry, Defender	1770	Bankruptcy, Debt, Aliment, Statute of limitations, Interlocutor, Promissory note	The late George Stewart, merchant, who had filed for bankruptcy in London in 1749, owed money to Peter Coalston, the petitioner's brother, who had not participated in the bankruptcy arrangement. Later, Stewart started making money again and died, quite solvent, in 1758, with his bother Archibald as heir. Jean Coalston, as her brother's heir, sought to collect the debt. At the issue was the extraterritoriality of English law, in particular whether the laws of bankruptcy in England were applicable and valid in Scotland, as bankruptcy proceedings in Scotland were voluntary for creditors, whereas in England they were obligatory.
Jean Farquharson v. Alexander Anderson	1800	Interlocutor, Aliment, Witness, Creditor, Mala Fides, Succession	After having a child outside of marriage, Jean Farquharson brought an action against Alexander Anderson for declarator of marriage or, in the alternative, damages for seduction. Anderson denied fathering Farquharson’s child. To prove their cases, the parties proffered many depositions of local residents who had witnessed events material to the case. Alleging that Anderson had engaged in a scheme of witness tampering, Farquharson objected to the admissibility of several such depositions. Case materials include reprinted depositions, excerpts from depositions, and references to many individuals in the local community.
John Aitchison and others v. The Magistrates and Billet-Master of Haddington	1795	Interlocutor, Burgh, Thirlage, Suspension, Representation, Magistrate
John Ballenden v. The Duke of Argyle	1791	Feu duties, Interlocutor, Infeftment, Charter, Reduction, Irritancy	John Ballenden petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor and subsequently petitioned against an Inner-house interlocutor, seeking reversal of the orders. The Duke of Argyll answered, resisting Ballenden's arguments that the interlocutor should be altered.
John Court, S.S.C., Common Agent v. Mrs Tierney	1832	Debt, Creditor, Interest, Arrestment, Consignation, Interlocutor	John Court, S.S.C., Common Agent, pursued Mrs Tierney in a multiplepointing and exoneration proceeding concerning the estate of Lewis Cuthbert, Esq. The action arose from a process raised by Abram Wildey Robarts against Cuthbert's creditors and representatives, and subsequently the Earl of Galloway and J. A. S. M'Kenzie reclaimed against an interlocutor issued by Lord Fullerton, asking the Court to alter his decision.
John Finlay v. Robert Syme Clerk to the Signet	1772	Hypothec, Debt security, Debt, Trustee, Interlocutor, Diligence	Robert Syme, defender, had in his possession a number of papers belonging to John Finlay, pursuer. Finlay sued his own father, Robert Finlay, and asked Syme for the papers as evidence in the suit against his father. Syme sought to retain Finlay's papers because Finlay was indebted to him. The court twice ordered Syme, by interlocutor, to return the papers to Finlay's custody. Syme refused, claiming that he had a hypothec (security) on the writings in his custody. Syme argued that he was not required to return the papers until Finlay satisfied his debt to Syme. Syme cited authorities for the proposition that agents have a right of hypothec or retention in their client's writings for claims of payment.
John Gardner v. Smith and Wardrobe	1773	Tutor and Pupil, Penalty, Aliment, Statute, Interlocutor, Creditor	John Smith entered into an indenture to be an apprentice to John Gardner, a wright. Smith’s grandfather John Wardrop also was a party to the agreement, having agreed to provide board and washing for his grandson. The agreement had a term of three years and would be enforced by a £5 Sterling penalty if either side failed to perform its obligations. Smith entered into Gardner’s service, but he left the apprenticeship after about a year. Gardiner charged Smith and Wardrop for payment of the £5 Sterling penalty. However, Smith and Wardrop argued that the indenture agreement was void because it lacked a stamp signifying payment of a statutory duty. They also alleged that Gardner had taken up smuggling and was deficient in providing instruction.
John Miller, &c. v. Mrs A. Moodie or Anderson	1829	Creditor, Disposition, Succession, Liferent, Adjudication, Interlocutor	John Miller, William Roy, and William Thomson raised an action against Mrs Amelia Moodie or Anderson to compel her to complete a valid title and grant discharge of a heritable bond previously assigned to her. The defender denied that she was bound to make up titles to her children's heirs for the discharge of the bond, and subsequently submitted a reclaiming note seeking recall of the interlocutor and her assoilziement. The litigation concluded when William Harley, tutor-at-law for John Anderson, minuted that the pupil had no interest in the bond and consented to the completion of title at the defender's expense.
John Murray v. James Scott	1794	Feu duties, Teinds, Interlocutor, Feu, Sasine, Assignation	John Murray petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against James Scott. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
John Pendrich v. Andrew Pendrich	1794	Aliment, Succession, Marriage, Witness, Adjudication, Interlocutor	John Pendrich, son of the deceased John Pendrich, baker at Rosewell, and represented by his tutor ad litem, pursued Andrew and Marion Pendrich to prove a clandestine marriage of his father. He sought admission of the Haigs as witnesses ob penuriam testium, while the defenders answered that these witnesses were inadmissible due to their familial ties and involvement in the alleged scheme. John presented a bill of advocation asking the Court to remit to the Commissaries with instruction to recall two prior interlocutors, which Andrew and Marion opposed in their answer.
John Reid and Richard Thomson v. United Incorporation of Mary's Chapel	1792	Aliment, Sequestration, Interlocutor, Encroachment, Penalty, Suspension	John Reid and Richard Thomson, masons and builders, and others, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Henderland's interlocutor in their action against the United Incorporation of Mary's Chapel. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
John Wilson and Others v. James Scott and Others	1792	Debt, Aliment, Corporation, Charter, Succession, Interlocutor	John Wilson and others pursued James Scott, late Deacon, and other members of the Incorporation of Hammermen in Glasgow, contending that the defenders had unlawfully applied £20 from the corporation's funds to burgh reform. The defenders maintained that the Incorporation possessed legal power to apply its funds for public reform purposes. After the pursuers noted the financial history and assessment of the corporation, the defenders petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor.
Kemloe v. Dun, Reid, and Company	1767	Debt, Arrestment, Contract, Expenses, Interlocutor, Compensation	In 1756, Gideon Kemloe, a merchant in Stonehaven (Stonehyve), cosigned as security on a load of cloth purchased by William Wise on credit from Dun and Company in Aberdeen. Wise could not sell the linen, and Kemloe became charged with making the payment to Dun and Company. Kemloe sought a suspension of this payment, claiming that since Dun and Company were already in debt to Wise, that debt should be settled first. Handwritten notation on case document says "refused."
Kempt v. Liddell	1771	Debt, Evidence, Copartnership, Interlocutor, Oath, Creditor	In the early 1750s, pursuer James Kempt and defender David Liddel entered into a co-partnership for distilling spirits in Leith. In 1752 Kempt sued Liddel for outstanding debts arising from the partnership. One piece of evidence in the litigation was a cash-book mostly written by Liddel. The suit was dormant until revived in 1766. By this time the original cash-book written by Liddel was missing. In its place Kempt supplied a cash-book written by him (Kempt) or another person. Liddel maintained that this newer cash-book did not contain the original records of the co-partnership and therefore cannot be used against him in the litigation.
Knox v. Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow	1798	Procurator, Charter, Faculty, Penalty, Interlocutor, Contract	Hugh Knox, Writer in Glasgow, petitioned the Court against the Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow, seeking to remit their regulation that imposed £30 of entry money upon him on the grounds that his apprenticeship had ended before the regulation was enacted and the charge was therefore retrospective and oppressive. The Faculty answered, defending the regulation against his claims.
Laird v. Grindlay	1790	Tack, Creditor, Succession, Debt, Possession, Interlocutor	John Laird and Company, merchants in Greenock, pursued Walter Grindlay, farmer at Seabegs, and John Buchanan, his mandatory, regarding a mill lease and Henderson’s employment, charging the defenders with unlawful possession and subtenancy. The cause proceeded to proof in June 1790, after which the pursuers petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor in February 1791, and the defenders answered in April 1791, contesting the allegations of unlawful possession.
Lamb v. Neilson	1784	Apprentice, Cautioner, Deed, Interlocutor, Penalty, Representation	Andrew Lamb raised a charge to enforce an indenture executed by George Neilson, his apprentice, and William Neilson, a cautioner. The Neilsons sought a suspension of the charge, arguing that the indenture was void because it had not been properly stamped. Lamb argued that he could still obtain the stamp and pursue the action.
Lamont v. The Heritors of Urr	1796	Teinds, Augmentation, Stipend, Ranking and Sale, Heritor, Interlocutor	The Reverend Dr. David Lamont pursued the heritors of the parish of Urr to remit an interlocutor approving their scheme of locality, asserting that he held a proper heritable right to the teinds. The heritors petitioned the court, arguing that Lamont’s right had been acquired pendente lite and was therefore protected by the principle of nihil innovandum. Lamont answered their petition, contesting this argument.
Lauder v. Gibson	1793	Lease, Tack, Interdict, Possession, Aliment, Interlocutor	Dr. Colin Lauder pursued William Gibson regarding the use of a road, having obtained an interdict against Gibson. Gibson answered that the road was necessary for his farm and that the interdict caused him patrimonial loss, whereupon Lauder petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutors against suspension of the interdict. Gibson responded that the road had been historically used by his predecessors and was not excluded by the terms of his lease.
Lawson v. Macculloch	1797	Aliment, Debt, Interlocutor, Contract, Contract of separation, Creditor	David Macculloch petitioned the Court to remit Lord Craig's interlocutor, which found him liable to his wife, Lawson, for expenses and denied her claim to a larger aliment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
Liddel v. Melvine	1788	Debt, Adjudication, Bill of Exchange, Statute, Interlocutor, Suspension	David Liddel, merchant in Leith and charger for behoof of Jacobinus and Adrianus Vanderburghs, merchants at Rotterdam, submitted answers responding to the petition of James Melvine, shipmaster in Borrowstounness. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lindsay and Company v. Jones	1796	Debt, Arrestment, Contract, Interlocutor, Suspension, Caution	James Lindsay and Company, wood-merchants in Glasgow, challenged suspension proceedings brought by George Jones, proprietor of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Amphitheatres, arguing that the suspender's pursuit was irregular and incompetent. Jones maintained that it was competent to expede letters of suspension after the sist had elapsed. The dispute turned on whether suspension remained available once the period of delay had expired.
Lindsay v. M'Laren	1780	Admiralty, Jettison, Arrestment, Cautioner, Proof, Interlocutor	This case was about liability for goods jettisoned from a ship. Alexander Maclaren, master of the Diligence of Fortrose, caused goods belonging to David Lindsay to be thrown overboard during a storm. Lindsay sued Maclaren in the High Court of Admiralty, seeking compensation. Lindsay claimed that when goods were ejected to save a ship, it was the master’s duty to apportion liability among all owners of the ship’s cargo; according to Lindsay, Maclaren had failed to do this. Maclaren, in turn, brought an action against all the owners, including Lindsay, so that their liability could be calculated. Lindsay was successful in his action before the High Court of Admiralty, and Maclaren (together with his cautioner, Alexander Mackenzie) offered a bill of suspension in the Court of Session. Maclaren argued that the proceeding should be stayed until his action against the owners was concluded. However, Lindsay argued that Maclaren was liable because he failed to make up an average-bill apportioning liability to the other owners, and because he improperly stowed Lindsay’s goods above deck.
Loch v. Tweedie	1798	Arrestment, Aliment, Trespass, Poinding, Interlocutor, Penalty	John Loch pursued Alexander Tweedie regarding damages caused by Tweedie’s trespassing sheep, defending his poinding of the flocks and asserting statutory rights to distrain while disputing the defender’s allegations as to penalties and damages. Tweedie repeatedly petitioned the Court to alter interlocutors, first regarding Lord Craig’s order and later challenging subsequent decisions, while Loch reclaimed against an Inner House interlocutor and submitted defenses supported by witness testimony. Tweedie answered Loch’s reclaiming petition and continued to seek alteration of the Court’s interlocutors through November 1799.
Loch, et al v. Lord Hailes' Interlocutor	1789	Suspension, Interlocutor, Res judicata, Inhibition, Reduction, Declinator	John Loch, Esq., and others petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor of Lord Hailes concerning the quartering of soldiers in Caltonhill. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lockhart v. Henderson	1799	Divorce, Infidelity, Adultery, Aliment, Interlocutor, Libel	Jean Lockhart sought a divorce from James Henderson on grounds of adultery. Henderson counterclaimed that Lockhart had committed adultery. In 1793, the couple reconciled from a previous split over accusations of infidelity. In the new case, Henderson allegedly resumed his adultery, whereas Lockhart denied any extramarital affairs. Lockhart accused Henderson of marrying for her money. The legal proceedings hinged on whether Henderson's claim that Lockhart continued her adulterous activity barred her divorce proceedings.
Lord Halkerton v. Scott	1769	Interlocutor, Aliment, Presumption, Thirlage, Removing, Innovation	Lord Halkerton pursued James Scott of Brothertown regarding a causeway and cruive-dyke alleged to obstruct salmon passage. Scott condescended upon a proposal to sink part of his causeway to confine water within keying-stones, intending to remove objections to the construction. The superior heritors answered, arguing that the proposed alteration would not remedy the obstruction to salmon passage.

Documents discussing this subject (showing 100 of 2572)