RECORD. RE-REVISED CONDESCENDENCE for Pursuer; AND RE-REVISED ANSWERS for DEFENDERS.
Abstract
Answers by defenders to the argument that assignations were granted as security for advances, not as absolute purchase
John Walker v. John Low — Summons, 27 Oct 1828
Abstract
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.
REC. NOTE—J. LOW'S TRUSTEES, AGAINST Lord Medwyn's Interlocutor. C. F. Davidson, W. S. Defenders' Agent. Jas. Burness, S. S. C. Pursuer's Agent. Mr. Fergusson, Clerk.
Abstract
Court finds agreement between John Low and John Walker was security for £299, with reconveyance upon repayment; orders defender to account for rents and remaining debt.
Lyal v. Cooper — Opinion, 10 Sep 1808
Abstract
Tenant failed to remove grass at lease end, claiming harvest right under Keith v. Logies, but court held 'grass' meant pasture land to be vacated, not a crop.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — Answers, 1832 [2]
Abstract
Answers by Lords Justice Clerk, Glenlee, Cringletie, Meadowbank, Mackenzie, Corehouse, and Moncreiff to questions submitted to the consulted judges in causa Lyall against Cooper.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — 2 Dec 1831 [3]
Abstract
Interlocutor remitting lease dispute over grass removal timing and lease clauses to Second Division Lords for opinion on legal principles and practice.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — Opinion, 14 May 1830
Abstract
Court remits case to Second Division and permanent Lords Ordinary for written opinions on lease terms and removal rights regarding hay land.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — Answers, 1832
Abstract
Answers by the Lords of the Court to questions submitted in causa Lyall against Cooper, responding to the argument that sown grass should be treated as a corn crop under the lease terms.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — Answers, 7 Apr 1831
Abstract
Respondent objects to advocator's minute as irregular, claiming it introduces new averments without reference to closed record, violating Sederunt 1828 and procedural rules.
James Lyall v. Robert Cooper — Bill of Advocation, 27 Jul 1827
Abstract
Tenant Robert Cooper seeks to retain possession of hay crop despite lease ending at Whitsunday 1827, challenging sheriff-depute’s removal decree.
