1766–1767
DebtBill of ExchangePrescriptionInterlocutorCreditorHeritorPursuer Walter Colquhoun sought payment of a bill that was allegedly owed to his father by the father of defender John Campbell, Duke of Argyll. Campbell raised a defense based on his status as heir of inventory, which meant that his liability was limited to the value of the estate. He also argued that the action was precluded by the bill's age.
Documents in this case (3)
- Walter Colquhoun v. Duke of Argyle — Petition, 20 Dec 1766Ilay Campbell petitions to alter a recent court interlocutor, claiming the estate’s inventory was exhausted and the bill is antiquated, having lain dormant nearly 40 years.
- John Duke of Argyle v. Walter Colquhoun — Answers, 17 Dec 1766December 17, 1766 Answers by the tutors of Walter Colquhoun to the petition of John Duke of Argyle, responding to his defenses of exhausted inventory and antiquity of the bill.
- Walter Colquhoun v. Duke of Argyle — Petition, 3 Feb 1767Walter Colquhoun and tutors petition to alter prior ruling against Duke of Argyle, citing bill’s 1723 date and 1762 action to argue no prescription applies without evidence of payment.
People & places in this case
People involved
- Walter Colquhoun — Pursuer
- General John Campbell, 4th Duke of Argyll — Defender
- Sir Ilay Campbell, Lord Succoth, 1st Baronet of Succoth — Trustee/Tutor/Representative for Defender
- Cosmo Gordon, of Cluny — Advocate for Pursuer
- Alexander Boswell, Lord Auchinleck — Lord Ordinary
- John Campbell, of Mamore — Named in case documents
- Humphry Colquhoun — Named in case documents
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 1646
