IX.—INTERLOCUTOR on Pursuer's Petition for Aliment.
Abstract
Court refuses petition for aliment as debtor maintains two open shops managed by family for his benefit, and his statements are deemed untrustworthy.
RECLAIMING NOTE FOR WILLIAM BLACK, Merchant in Leith, and JOHN MITCHELL SINCLAIR, Merchant there, Creditors of Henry Mohring, formerly Provision Merchant, Leith, and presently Pris
Abstract
Creditors object to Henry Mohring’s cessio bonorum, alleging unexplained asset deficiency, false loss claims, and lack of books; court reviews petition for interim liberation.
William Fulton v. Robert Watt — Answers, 1 Dec 1847
Abstract
Defender admits purchase and horse's illness post-sale, denies negligence, claims disease predated sale.
William Fulton v. Alexander Watt — 10 Aug 1847
Abstract
Defender defends against pursuer’s claim for unpaid horse price, asserting animal was diseased at time of sale and he is not liable.
William Fulton v. Alexander Watt — Bill of Advocation, 10 Apr 1849 [2]
Abstract
William Fulton seeks to overturn a sheriff's interlocutor against Alexander Watt for unpaid purchase price of a horse sold at Beith on January 15, 1847, and requests court review and discharge of inferior judges.
RECORD. No. I. NOTE OF ADVOCATION. INTERLOCUTOR.
Abstract
Defender successfully defended against claim of horse illness pre-sale, with court finding seller responsible for pre-existing condition.
The Northern Assurance Company v. John Harvey, Robert Curle, and Ebenezer Hendry — Answers, 4 Jul 1849
Abstract
Answers by John Harvey, Robert Curle, and Ebenezer Hendry to the argument of the Northern Assurance Company that they are indebted for L.250 plus interest under a promissory note
Robert Martin v. W. & R. Torrs, William Tofts and Robert Tofts — Minute
Abstract
Petitioner seeks possession and interdict against respondents for breach of agreement and unauthorized removal of printing equipment.
Robert Martin v. W. & R. Tofts, Printers in Edinburgh, and William Tofts and Robert Tofts, Printers in Edinburgh — Bill of Advocation, 28 Feb 1850
Abstract
Defenders assert no sale occurred and claim pursuer’s prior Sheriff-court petition bars this action for £854 and interest.
W. & R. Tofts v. Robert Martin — Additional Appendix, 24 Apr 1850 [2]
Abstract
Tofts seek to invalidate a 1847 agreement with Martin, claiming it was void as a fraudulent preference against creditors and that all claims were extinguished by prior composition and payment.
