Date6 Apr 1797TypeAnswersCaseMackenzie v. MackenzieAuthorDavid Williamson Robertson Ewart, of BalgrayLength11 pagesRepositoryUniversity of Virginia Law Library (Special Collections)ContainerUVALL Box 15Appendix1 item (1 pp.) Abstract AI-generated April 6, 1797 Answers by Alexander Kenneth Mackenzie to the petition of Sir Hector Mackenzie, arguing that the conveyance of his provision was ipso jure null and void due to lack of curator consent ← Mackenzie v. Mackenzie — Petition2 of 4 in this caseMackenzie v. An Inner-House Interlocutor — Petition, 24 Jan 1798 →People in this documentDavid Williamson Robertson Ewart, of BalgraySubjectsDebtAlimentSuccessionDeedExecutorFactorReductionConveyancePlaces mentionedGlasgowGairlochLondonMiddlesex