Legal Subject: Verdict |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Graham and Rowland v. Dundas and Richardson | 1792 | Libel, Theft, Verdict, pannels, Proof, Evidence | Robert Graham and James Rowland, as pursuers, filed an information against Dundas and Richardson arguing that the jury's verdict against them was unintelligible and therefore could not support a sentence of condemnation. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| His Majesty's Advocate v. Muir | 1797 | Libel, Verdict, homicide, Arrestment, Aliment, Trial | Thomas Muir, soldier in the 65th Regiment of Foot and defender, argued that he could not be convicted of culpable homicide if indicted only for murder. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| His Majesty's Advocate v. Murdison | 1773 | Theft, Trial, Verdict, Aliment, Arrestment, Sequestration | Alexander Murdison was subject to a criminal indictment alleging that he and his herder, John Miller, stole certain sheep “or [were guilty] of receiving and having in their custody the aforesaid parcels of sheep.” Murdison was convicted, and subsequently challenged the verdict on three grounds. First, according to Murdison, the verdict did not specify whether the defendants were guilty of theft or of receiving stolen property. Second, no verdict was given on several of the specific charges in the indictment. Finally, the verdict was signed on a Sunday. |
| Murdoch v. Lord Rockville's Interlocutor | 1791 | Reduction, Disposition, Insanity, Verdict, Interlocutor, Infeftment | William Murdoch petitioned the Court to alter Lord Rockville's interlocutor, which required him to extract proceedings from Cupar in an action of reduction. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
Documents discussing this subject (23)
- Alexander Murdison v. James Montgomery of Stanhope — Information, 9 Feb 1773
- Alexander Murdison v. James Montgomery — Information, 9 Feb 1773
- Ann Watson and Isobel Watson v. Alex. Watson — Defences, 14 Dec 1829
- Claud Currie v. Peter Jardine and Margaret Currie — Revised Case, 26 Apr 1827
- Henry Erskine v. John Hannah — Information, 20 Oct 1806
- His Majesty's Advocate and the Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland v. John Thomson and John Nilson otherwise Nelson — Information, 6 Oct 1806
- His Majesty's Advocate v. Peter or Patrick Young — Information, 10 Mar 1788
- James and Andrew Muir v. John and Samuel Muir — Bill of Exceptions, 1835
- James Cleland v. Mrs. Laurie's Representatives — Appendix, 23 May 1848
- James Montgomery of Stanhope v. Alexander Murdison and John Miller — Information, 1 Feb 1773
- James Smith v. Warren Maude Lambe — Answers, 7 Dec 1814
- John Barclay v. Patrick Whitson Jun. — Summons, 13 Dec 1823 [3]
- John Hannah v. His Majesty's Advocate — Information, 20 Oct 1806
- John Thomson and John Nilson otherwise Nelson v. Henry Erskine of Ammondell and the Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland — Information, 20 Oct 1806
- LC Volume 07 — Petition, 5 Mar 1834 [2]
- Mary Dinwiddie Blackwood or Bayne v. Steele's Representatives — Minute, 30 Jun 1836
- Mrs Mary Dinwiddie Blackwood or Bayne v. Mrs Janet Liddell Steele or Stodart, James Stodart, Mary Elizabeth Steele, Andrew Steele, and Helen Barbara Steele — Answers, 3 Dec 1834
- Murdoch v. Lord Rockville's Interlocutor — Petition, 29 Nov 1791
- Peter Young v. Ilay Campbell — Information, 12 Mar 1788
- Petition — Jas. Marshall for New Trial
- Robert Graham and James Rowland v. Robert Dundas and William Richardson — Information, 17 Mar 1792
- Thomas Muir v. His Majesty's Advocate — Information, 16 Nov 1797
- William Mills v. His Majesty's Advocate — Information, 2 Aug 1785