Legal Subject: Bill of Lading |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duncan v. Maclintock and Smith | 1778 | Copartnership, Trade, Bill of Lading, Debt, Arrestment, Bill of Exchange | In November 1774, Robert Maclintock Jr. freighted the brigantine Rainbow to carry goods to Virginia and return a cargo of wheat. His father and David Smith joined in the adventure, and the three wrote Virginia merchants Charles Duncan and John Brown, empowering them to draw on Maclintock jr. for the price. According to the defenders of this action, Smith and Maclintock Sr., in the summer of 1775, when the Rainbow returned to Clyde with the cargo of wheat, Maclintock jJr. informed his co-adventurers that the cargo was not for them, but solely for himself. Two years later he stopped paying his bills and left the country, and the defenders received a demand from Charles Duncan for the unpaid value of the Rainbow's cargo. Duncan, the pursuer of this action, argued that as co-adventurers the defenders were liable for the price of the cargo, and that the bill had been drawn solely on Maclintock jr.'s account out of secrecy: Maclintock Sr. was a principal in the Merchant Bank, and it was convenient for him that his name did not appear on the bill. Duncan further accused the defenders of obliterating evidence of a copartnership contained in documents possessed by Betty Maclintock, the aunt of Maclintock Jr. The defenders argued, on the other hand, that they were not co-partners with the younger Maclintock, and were therefore not liable for his debts. The bailies of Glasgow, who first heard the case, repelled the defense, and Lord Braxfield refused the defenders' bill of advocation. They then petitioned the Court to compel Lord Braxfield to pass the bill. |
| McGowan v. Inner-House Interlocutor | 1788 | Bankruptcy, Debt, Arrestment, Sequestration, Creditor, Bill of Lading | Pursuer William McGowan petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
Documents discussing this subject (48)
- Alexander and John Mackies v. Alexander Houftoun, James Stuart, and other underwriters — Information, 1 Feb 1774
- APPENDIX. BILL of LADING of Iron by Messrs THOMSON BONAR and Company.
- APPENDIX. CORRESPONDENCE produced for James Hamilton senior and Company---Charges.
- APPENDIX. I. INGLIS and others, Assignees of Crane, a Bankrupt, against USHERWOOD.
- APPENDIX. No. I. CERTIFICATE by John Holland, Esq; Freight Accomptant, Clerk to the Committee of Private Trade, of the Honourable East-India Company. No. II. CERTIFICATE by Robert
- APPENDIX. No. I. No. II. No. III. Copy LETTER, D. Taylor & Sons to Mr P. Lyon, Druggist, Edinburgh, dated 14th September 1798, and Excerpt from the Invoice, as to the contents of a
- David Lindsay v. Rebecca M'Kenzie alias Aird — Memorial, 25 Jan 1780
- DEFENCES FOR DAVID BALDERSTON, JOHN M'LELLAN, HUGH HAMILTON, WILLIAM MARTIN, and GEORGE OUGHTERSON, all Merchants in Greenock; and JOHN LOUDEN, Insurance Broker in Glasgow; TO THE
- Duncan Auld & Wood, Andrew M'Millan, Hugh Morris junior, and Joshua Senior v. John Moyes and John Galloway — Answers, 17 May 1805
- Duncan v. Maclintock and Smith — Petition, 29 Jul 1778
- Finlay, Duff, and Company v. James Hamilton Sen. and Company — Answers, 8 Sep 1814
- George Dempster and Company v. John Drybrough and Others — Condescendence [2]
- George Moncreiff v. Messrs. Barry and Bruce and Mandatary — Bill of Advocation, 2 Jul 1813
- I.—PURSUERS' PROOF.
- James Gray v. William Hart and the Owners of the said ship — Memorial, 22 Nov 1781
- James Grieve and Mandatory v. David Dow — Revised Condescendence and Answers
- James Grieve and William Middleton v. David Dow — Reclaiming Note, 6 Feb 1839
- James Grieve v. David Dow — Bill of Advocation, 21 Aug 1838 [2]
- James Grieve v. David Dow — Replies
- James Likly v. Ralph and Andrew Stevenson — Minute, 21 May 1824
- James Likly v. Ralph Stevenson and Andrew Stevenson — Answers, 1823
- LC Volume 03 — Petition, 8 Apr 1813 [2]
- LC Volume 06 — Petition, 9 Apr 1818
- McGowan v. Inner-House Interlocutor — Petition, 17 Dec 1788
- Petition — Duncan, Auld & Wood against Lord Hermand's Interlocutor
- Petition — Findlay, Duff & Co. against Lord Craigie's Interlocutor
- Petition — John Milne against Lord Alloway's Interlocutor
- Petition — John Moyes, Master of the Margaret of Leith; and John Galloway Merchant in Leith, Owner, or part Owner, of said Vessel
- Petition — Martin & Kerr against Lord Hailes's Interlocutors
- Petrie's Executors and Mandatories v. George Aitchison and Company — Summons, 4 Jun 1838
- Reclaiming Petition — John Duncan jun. against Lord Bannatyne's Interlocutor
- RIDLEY & COMPANY AND MANDATORY v. SLOAN — Appendix, 28 Jul 1835
- Robert Mowbray v. James Marr — Condescendence [2]
- Roderick M'Iver v. Barros and Chanto — 22 Jan 1822
- Simon Berard v. Robert Hunter — Information, 16 May 1793
- Simon Berard v. Robert Hunter — Information, 16 May 1793 [3]
- Thomas Langton v. Crockatt — Complainers' Case, 12 May 1830
- Thomas Langton v. Robert Crockatt — 17 Feb 1829
- Thomas Langton v. Robert Crockatt — Revised Answers, 1828
- Thomas Ridley and Company and F. A. Bell v. William Sloan — Statement of Facts, 9 Feb 1836
- Thomas Ridley and Company and Frederick A Bell v. William Sloan — Reclaiming Petition, 5 Jan 1836
- Trustees for the Creditors of William Hamilton and Company and Robert Donald and Company v. Archibald Hamilton — Answers, 22 Feb 1791
- VI.—Excerpt from page 7 of CLAIM for Defender, Mr Gordon, No. 15 of productions in the Submission, being No. 8 of Submission, titled, Answers for Geo. Gordon, Esquire, to the Claim
- William Allan v. John Morison — Answers, 6 Dec 1817
- William Baxter and Edward Baxter v. George Aitchison and Company — Revised Case, 6 Jun 1839
- William Gibson and Company v. James Dow and Company — Bill of Suspension, 7 Oct 1813 [2]
- William Johnson v. James Scott and Son — Answers, 29 Jun 1818
- William Johnson v. James Scott and Son — Petition, 9 Apr 1818
