1794
DeedWitnessTestamentSuccessionAssignationExecutorYorkston and his co-petitioners pursued Grieve concerning the validity of a testamentary deed executed by the illiterate Jean Ferguson. They argued that the instrument was valid despite the notary’s docquet failing to record that it was read over to the testatrix, whereas Grieve maintained that because Ferguson could neither read nor write, the deed required to be read to her before she authorized the notary’s signature, and was void for want of that formality.AI-generated
Documents in this case (2)
- Yorkston — Petition, 29 Jan 1794January 29, 1794 Memorial of the petitioners, arguing that a testamentary deed executed by one notary and two witnesses is valid despite the notary's docquet not recording that it was read over to the testatrix
- Mary Grieve v. James Yorkston, Barbara Douglas, and Elspeth Libertone — Answers, 25 Jun 1794June 25, 1794 Memorial of the respondent, arguing that a deed executed by Jean Ferguson, who could not read or write, must have been read over to her before authority was given to the notary to sign it, or it is void.
People & places in this case
People involved
- Hew Dalrymple, Lord Drummore — Party
- Robert Hamilton — Advocate for Party
- James Burnett, Lord Monboddo — Lord Ordinary
- Sir James Fergusson, of Kilkerran, Lord Kilkerran — Lord Ordinary
