Fothringham — Petition, 24 Feb 1796
Abstract
Petitioners reclaim interlocutor upholding 1765 disposition of Balfour estate to defender, arguing marriage contract’s devolution clause overrides later settlements.
William Fothringham v. Colonel Alexander Fothringham Ogilvie and others — Answers, 2 Sep 1795
Abstract
Sept 2, 1795: Respondents argue estate of Balfour vested fee-simple in second son, predeceasing parents, so petitioner has no claim as heir.
Thomas Hamilton v. John Scott — Answers, 30 Nov 1797
Abstract
November 30, 1797 Answers by Thomas Hamilton, Treasurer for the Poor of Avondale, to the petition of the Reverend Mr John Scott, asserting that the justices had jurisdiction and the decree was regular.
Scott — Petition, 5 Sep 1797
Abstract
September 5, 1797 Petition of the Reverend Mr John Scott, against Lord Methven's interlocutor
Fotheringham and Hume v. Ogilvie and Others — Petition, 12 May 1795
Abstract
May 12, 1795 Petition of William Fothringham asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
Eliott v. Lord Justice Clerk's Interlocutor — Petition, 27 Jan 1797
Abstract
Petitioner Sir William Eliott seeks to reclaim an interlocutor denying his claim to L. 50:10s. paid to writer Thomas Tod, arguing the account was not prescribed and falls outside triennial prescription scope.
Edie, Laird, and Others v. Lord Craig's Interlocutor — Petition, 13 Jun 1797
Abstract
June 13, 1797 Petition of Messrs Edie and Laird, Merchants in London, asking the Court to alter Lord Craig's interlocutor
Petition — Additional, 4 Mar 1797
Abstract
March 4, 1797 Additional Petition of Robert Dunmore asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
Dunmore v. Trustee for Buchanans — Petition, 15 Feb 1797
Abstract
February 15, 1797 Petition of Robert Dunmore, Esq; asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor
Robert Dunmore v. Archibald Newbigging — Answers, 13 Oct 1796
Abstract
Archibald Newbigging, trustee of James and Archibald Buchanan’s sequestrated estate, defends rejecting Robert Dunmore’s claim to the Ballindalloch mill under a copartnery contract, citing Dunmore’s insolvency and the contract’s intent to preserve business continuity.
