SCOS Archive | The University of Virginia Law Library

Abstract

Answers by Mrs Anna Wedderburn Ogilvy and Peter Wedderburn Ogilvy, Esq., her Husband, responding to the defences or objections for James Lawson.

Abstract

AI-generated

Court considers whether 1830 statute limits shipowners' liability for cargo loss when cargo was hypothecated to fund ship repairs.

Abstract

AI-generated

Defenders deny existence of holograph letter by Miss Margaret Seton to Miss Catherine Lillie, claiming it was never written, never acknowledged, and destroyed unlawfully.

Abstract

AI-generated

Pursuers claim full indemnity for cargo lost due to master’s hypothecation, arguing statute limits apply only to embezzlement or misconduct, not to forced loans for ship repairs.

Abstract

AI-generated

Defenders claim immunity under 53 Geo. III. c. 159 for cargo loss due to master’s bottomry bond, without owner privity or fault.

Abstract

AI-generated

Pursuers claim cargo value and charges against vessel owners after bottomry bond sale; defenders invoke statute and master’s power to shield from liability.

Abstract

AI-generated

Defenders deny fault for failure to deliver cargo; claim shipmaster unilaterally granted bottomry bond in foreign port to fund repairs, leading to vessel and cargo sale by creditors.

Abstract

AI-generated

Defenders assert the 1814 lease sale to John Low was valid, with no grounds to challenge redemption rights or assignations, and the pursuer is bound by her author's admissions.

Abstract

AI-generated

Answers by defenders to the argument that assignations were granted as security for advances, not as absolute purchase

Abstract

AI-generated

Pursuer seeks declarator that subtack and assignation to defender were in security, plus accounting and retrocession; defender denies security, asserts absolute ownership and repurchase terms.

Subscribe to

Mrs Anna Wedderburn Ogilvy and Peter Wedderburn Ogilvy v. James Lawson — Answers, 10 Apr 1828

Thomas Langton & Mandatory v. Robert Crockat & Others — Opinion, 21 Jun 1831 [2]

David Lillie v. Mrs Margaret Lillie or Smith and Mrs Paterson Lillie or Craik — Answers, 1 Sep 1831

Thomas Langton v. Crockatt — Complainers' Case, 12 May 1830

Thomas Langton and Messrs. Gordon and Harkness v. Robert Crockatt and Others — Revised Case, 30 Sep 1830

Thomas Langton v. Robert Crockatt — 17 Feb 1829

Thomas Langton v. Robert Crockatt — Revised Answers, 1828

APPENDIX TO RECLAIMING NOTE for John Falconer, Writer in Stonehaven; Thomas Barclay Armstrong of Clipston Street, London; and Misses Penuel, Eliza, Isabella, and Margaret Low, Daug

RECORD. RE-REVISED CONDESCENDENCE for Pursuer; AND RE-REVISED ANSWERS for DEFENDERS.

John Walker v. John Low — Summons, 27 Oct 1828