1791–1792
Feu dutiesInterlocutorInfeftmentCharterReductionIrritancyJohn 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.AI-generated
Documents in this case (3)
- John Ballenden v. The Duke of Argyle — Petition, 6 Dec 1791December 6, 1791 Petition of John Ballenden asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
- John Ballenden v. The Duke of Argyle — Petition, 15 May 1792May 15, 1792 Petition of John Ballenden against Inner-house Interlocutor
- John Ballenden v. His Grace John Duke of Argyll — Answers, 7 Jun 1792June 7, 1792 Answers by His Grace John Duke of Argyll to the petition of John Ballenden, responding to the argument that the interlocutor should be altered
People & places in this case
People involved
- Donald Macdonald — Party
- John Moir — Advocate for Party
- Henry Dundas, 1st Viscount Melville — Advocate for Party
- Robert Paton — Advocate for Party
- James Marshall, Esq. — Advocate for Party
- Robert Bruce, of Kennet, Lord Kennet — Lord Ordinary
Places
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 7252
