Skip to main content
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • instagram
Scottish Court of Session Digital Archive
SCOS The Scottish Court of Session Papers University of Virginia Law Library
  • Explore
    • Map
    • Browse by County
    • People & Place Network
  • Scholarship
  • About
    • The 2026 Modernization
    • Searching the Archive
    • Computational Methods
  • Search
  • News

Breadcrumb

  1. Home

George Binnie v. Niel M'Millan — Appendix, 7 Jun 1832

Abstract
AI-generated
June 7, 1832 Appendix by Niel M'Millan, grocer in Cartsdyke, arguing that George Bennie, mariner in Greenock, is not entitled to aliment due to refusal to sign an obligation for peace

Era of the French Revolution

  • Read more about Era of the French Revolution

The Legal Profession

  • Read more about The Legal Profession

Robert Dreghorn v. Thomas Laurie — Answers, 13 Jun 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
June 13, 1795 Answers by Thomas Laurie, Collector of the Poors Rates for the City of Glasgow, and for the Magistrates and Town-Council, responding to the argument made by Robert Dreghorn, Esq; of Ruch-hill.

Dreghorn — Petition, 13 May 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
May 13, 1795 Petition of Mr Dreghorn asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor

John Zephaniah Holwell and John Young v. Dame Mary Wedderburn — Information, 15 Sep 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
September 15, 1795 Information of Mr. Holwell, arguing that Lady Cumming's bond of provision was invalid as it was granted after his prior debt and without proof of delivery or bankruptcy

John Zephaniah Holwell v. Dame Mary Wedderburn otherwise Cumming — Information, 27 Nov 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
November 27, 1795 Information of defenders, arguing that a bond of provision executed before marriage is not voidable as fraudulent or in prejudice of creditors

William Scott, Procurator-Fiscal of the County of Mid-Lothian v. William Smith, and Others, Chaise-Hirers in Edinburgh — Memorial, 12 Dec 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
December 12, 1795 Memorial of the postmasters, arguing that the justices of the peace have no jurisdiction to regulate their fares and that they are entitled to increase charges due to economic hardship.

Sir John Ogilvie of Inverquharity v. Sir David Carnegie of Southesk — Duplies, 27 Feb 1795

Abstract
AI-generated
February 27, 1796 Duplies of Sir David Carnegie of Southesk, Baronet, and others, Respondents, replying to the complaint of Sir John Ogilvy of Innerquharity, Baronet, that the freeholders erred in refusing to admit him to the roll of freeholders of the county of Forfar.

Sir John Ogilvie of Inverquharity v. Sir David Carnegie of Southesk — Replies, 18 Feb 1796

Abstract
AI-generated
February 18, 1796 Replies of Sir John Ogilvy of Inverquharity, Baronet, to the Answers for Sir David Carnegie of Southesk, Baronet, respondent, arguing that the valuation of his lands of Baldovan is L. 386: 5: 8 as demonstrated by cess-book entries and receipts.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 320
  • Page 321
  • Page 322
  • Page 323
  • Current page 324
  • Page 325
  • Page 326
  • Page 327
  • Page 328
  • …
  • Next page Next ›
  • Last page Last »
Subscribe to
Home

The Scottish Court of Session Digital Archive is a multi-institutional collaborative initiative featuring Session Papers held by the Arthur J. Morris Law Library at the University of Virginia School of Law, the Library of Congress, and the University of Edinburgh.

The project is made possible with generous investments from the Horatio and Florence Farmer Fund at the University of Virginia School of Law and the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation. 

Support SCOS with a tax deductible gift.

© 2026 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia
© 2026 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia

User account menu

  • Log in