1796–1797
BankruptcyTrusteeDispositionCreditorSequestrationFraudJames Marshall, Writer to the Signet and trustee, challenged a preference claimed by Taylor and Smith over the proceeds of the lands of Dubhall and Auld's Acre from a bankrupt estate, asserting that the bankrupt held no valid title at the time of the bond. After the Court sustained the respondents' claim by interlocutor, Marshall petitioned to have that decision altered. The respondents opposed the petition as an irregular and belated reclaiming motion, arguing it was barred by acquiescence and prior litigation.AI-generated
Documents in this case (4)
- James Marshall v. James Taylor and Dr. Wyville Smith — Representation, 28 Jun 1796Trustee opposes respondents’ preference claim over Auld’s Acre proceeds, asserting bankrupt had no valid title at bond time.
- Marshall — Petition, 15 Jun 1797June 15, 1797 Petition of James Marshall, Writer to the Signet, asking the Court to alter its interlocutor which sustains Messrs Taylor and Smith's claim of preference upon the price of the lands of Dubhall.
- James Marshall v. James Taylor and Dr. Wyville Smith — Answers, 29 Jun 1797Respondents oppose petitioner’s late reclaiming application, calling it irregular, barred by acquiescence and prior litigation.
People & places in this case
People involved
- James Marshall, Esq. — Party
- Robert Dalzell — Party
- David Balfour, W.S. — Party
- Sir Francis Elliot — Party
- James Primrose, Earl of Rosebery — Party
- Francis Jeffrey — Advocate for Party
- Mr. James Smith, of Balharry — Advocate for Party
- John MacLaurin, Lord Dreghorn — Lord Ordinary
Places
- Edinburgh (principal)
- Linlithgow
