This case was about the ability of creditors to recover debts from an individual member of a partnership. The debtor in question, James Dunlop, was a partner in John Carlyle and Company. After Carlyle and Company failed, trustees were appointed to represent two separate but related interests: the partnership itself (for the purpose of unwinding the firm) and the partnership’s creditors. These trustees lodged two types of claims with the trustees of James Dunlop, who had also become insolvent. First, on behalf of the partnership, the trustees pursued claims for debts owed by Dunlop to the firm. Second, on behalf of the firm’s creditors, they claimed that Dunlop was personally liable for the firm’s debts. When Dunlop’s trustees refused these claims, the Carlyle trustees sued. Dunlop’s trustees, as defenders, argued that the pursuers could not be ranked on Dunlop’s estate for both categories of debt.
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 1383, , pg. 14610, , pg. Society app., pt. 1, at 5