Hope Stewart, James Miller and George Steel v. Sir Alexander Muir Mackenzie — Answers, 2 Oct 1823
Abstract
Respondent defends against petitioners' claim to Mill of Gourdie, citing 1793 arbitral decree and rejecting trustees' altered interpretation of prior obligations.
APPENDIX. NO. I. BILL of SUSPENSION for Mrs Mackenzie, &c.
Abstract
Parties seek charge suspension over breach of 1789 dam height decree, citing compliance and flood damage beyond their control.
Petition — Hope Steuart, Esq. of Ballechin, James Miller, Esq. Younger of Milton, and Mr George Steel, residing at Ruffel, the surviving and accepting Trustees of the deceased John Hagart, Esq. of Glendelvine
Abstract
Petitioners, as trustees of Mr Hagart, challenge the interlocutor upholding respondent’s right to remove mud from mill dam, while conceding other findings.
Hope Steuart, James Miller and George Steel, Trustees of John Hagart v. Sir A. M. Mackenzie — Reclaiming Petition, 2 Jul 1823
Abstract
Trustees of deceased John Hagart petition to compel Sir Alexander Mackenzie to convey Mill of Gourdie and address water rights, but Lord Ordinary dismisses claims and remits dam inspection.
Robert Caldwell v. Mrs Sarah Battersby — Answers, 15 Jan 1824
Abstract
Respondents answer petition challenging remit to Jury Court, asserting interlocutor is final under statute and action is relevant.
Mrs. Battersby and Husband, and Mandatory v. Robert Caldwell — Answers
Abstract
Answers by the defender to the argument of Mrs. Sarah Smith or Battersby, denying entitlement to any claim and asserting readiness to bring counter-advocation
Sarah Smith or Battersby v. Robert Caldwell — Answers, 31 May 1819
Abstract
Defender denies pursuer’s claim of honest acquisition of cotton yarn, asserting suspicion of theft and failure to produce evidence of lawful possession.
Mrs. Sarah Smith or Battersby v. Caldwell — Condescendence, 18 Jan 1823
Abstract
Pursuer seeks damages for expenses and reputational harm from unlawful seizure of goods by defender, challenging court’s refusal to entertain new claim based on prior application.
Mrs. and William Battersby v. Robert Caldwell — Answers, 15 Sep 1819
Abstract
Answers by Robert Caldwell to the petition of Mrs. and William Battersby, asserting that the complaint is groundless and the yarns were not embezzled as alleged.
