AI-transcribed

Execution under a fi. fa. POINDING OF THE GROUND; Distress by a mortgagee.

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.

Legal Subject: Poinding

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
A. Keltie v. R. Wilson 1827 Debt, Poinding, Sist, Inhibition, Diligence, Arrestment Andrew Keltie of Gelvan petitioned the Court against Robert Wilson, writer in Edinburgh, seeking relief from an illegal poinding executed in violation of a court-ordered stay. Keltie alleged that Wilson had poinded during a sist on a bill of suspension, breaching procedural protections and amounting to contempt of court. The litigation proceeded from an initial petition for redress to a Revised Case arguing that such poinding during suspension constituted contempt.
Archer v. Donaldson 1793 Debt, Cautioner, Poinding, Sequestration, Bankruptcy, Aliment Andrew Archer and Margaret Low petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor that had assoilzied them from a process of reduction. On the same day, David Guthrie, James Ker, and others, trustees for the creditors of William Fullarton, likewise petitioned the Court to alter the same interlocutor.
Clifford and Sons v. Mosman 1772 Poinding, Arrestment, Ranking of Creditors, Debt, Bankruptcy, Aliment John Syme and Son, merchants in Leith, owed money to Clifford and Son, pursuer, merchants in Amsterdam. Due to the nature of the transaction, the money was required to pass through the hands of William Hogg and Son, merchants in Edinburgh. (In the transaction, another person, Archibald Maclean, advanced money to William Hogg and Son, which they in turn gave to John Syme and Son. McLean was then reimbursed by Clifford and Son). William Hogg and Son subsequently encounter financial problems, which raised the possibility that its creditors would to collect the money. Clifford and Son sought to avoid this possibility. Hugh Mosman, a writer in Edinburgh and creditor of William Hogg and Son, claimed an interest in the payment from John Syme and Son to William Hogg and Son. Clifford and Son disputed Mosman's claim by arguing that they were entitled to the payment because they provided the funds in the first place.
Helen Stevenson v. Colquhoun Grant & James Stewart 1767 Aliment, Arrestment, Bill of Exchange, Poinding, Sequestration, Trustee Colquhoun Grant, writer to the signet, and James Stewart, writer in Doually, answered the petition of Mrs. Helen Stevenson, arguing that the poinding executed by them was preferable to the prior arrestment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lachlan Maclean v. Elizabeth Maclean 1772 Debt, Aliment, Succession, Property, Poinding, Sasine Lachlan MacLean, pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against Elizabeth Maclean, defender. 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.
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.
More and Irvine v. Gibson 1770 Poinding, Deforcement, Debt, Arrestment, Cautioner, Diligence Pursuers More and Irvine were merchants in Gottenburgh (Gothenburg), Sweden. William Duncan owed them money. Robert Monro also agreed to act as a cautioner for Duncan. More and Irvine obtained an order of poinding for Duncan's assets, allowing them to secure Duncan's assets for payment of the debt. Duncan's stepson, defender Walter Gibson, prevented More and Irvine's agents from entering Duncan's house. Gibson claimed that he, not Duncan, owned the house. When More and Irvine's agents later returned to the house with letters of open doors, they found the house emptied of its most valuable furniture. Gibson also claimed that he was the rightful owner of the furniture in the house. More and Irvine accused Gibson of obstructing the poinding.
Welsh v. M'Veaghs 1780 Debt, Arrestment, Cautioner, Poinding, Diligence, Aliment Margaret Lumsden, relict of Hugh M'Veagh, and Henry Macveagh, his son, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor regarding whether a messenger might be entrusted with custody of money recovered by poindings. William Welsh answered, defending the liability of Lumsden and Macveagh as cautioners for a fraudulent messenger.
William Hart v. John and James Naesmith 1775 Debt, Adjudication, Poinding, Annual Rent, Penalty, Feu duties Michael Naesmith borrowed £480 from William Hamilton in 1731 and by 1740 John and James Naesmith, defenders, had become bound for the debt. After Michael's death, John and James received adjudication against a tenement he had owed, in order to recover what he owed them. In 1774, Hart, pursuer, and son of another creditor of Michael, brought an adjudication against the tenement.

Documents discussing this subject (showing 100 of 140)