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

APPENDIX. No. I. Copy—SUMMONS of DAMAGES, Jean Brown and Fiscal, against Mary Bogle, &c.

Abstract
AI-generated
Jean Brown sues Mary Bogle and Michael Gilfillan for defamation and damages after Bogle publicly accused her of adultery and ruined her reputation.

PET.—M. GILFILLAN, FOR Recalling Inhibition. UNTO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, THE LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, THE PETITION OF MICHAEL GILFILLAN of Wester Mains, Writer in Glasgow;

Abstract
AI-generated
Petitioner seeks recall of inhibition against him and wife, alleging malicious libel by a female pursuer and abettors to extort money via defamatory, irrelevant falsehoods in the summons.

Michael Gilfillan and Mary Bogle v. Peter Adam, John Burnet, and William Goodwin — Objections, 16 Dec 1823

Abstract
AI-generated
Complainants object to auditor's disallowance of fees paid to senior counsel for advising on procedural deadlines and complex case management.

ANS.—Alex. Ure, TO THE COND.—Michael Gilfillan & Spouse William Guthrie, Respondent's Agent. A. P. Henderson, Complainers' Agent. Mr. Hamilton, Clerk. REVISED ANSWERS FOR ALEXANDER

Abstract
AI-generated
Respondent denies circulating libellous summons, blaming complainers’ agents for public dissemination and asserting innocence against malice claims.

ANS.—William Guthrie, TO COND.—Michael Gilfillan & Spouse. Party, Agent for Respondent. A. P. Henderson, Agent for Complainers. Mr Hamilton, Clerk. REVISED ANSWERS FOR WILLIAM GUTH

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by William Guthrie, Agent for Respondent, to the condescendence of Michael Gilfillan and Mrs Mary Bogle, denying distribution of summons copies and asserting procedural compliance.

Michael Gilfillan and Mrs Mary Bogle v. William Guthrie — Condescendence

Abstract
AI-generated
Complainers allege respondents unlawfully circulated a libellous summons beyond court limits, exposing private clients to public humiliation.

Mr & Mrs Gilfillan v. Wm. Guthrie & A. Ure — State of the Process, 3 Jan 1824

Abstract
AI-generated
Complainers seek to sustain interdict against respondents and declare it perpetual, while ordering respondents to return summonses and pay expenses.

Answers — Ans.—Alex. Ure, to the Cond.—Michael Gilfillan & Spouse

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by the respondent to the condescendence of Michael Gilfillan & Spouse, denying that he circulated the summons against the complainers and asserting that the publicity arose from the complainers' own actions.

ANS.—William Guthrie, TO COND.—Michael Gilfillan & Spouse. Party, Agent for Respondent. A. P. Henderson, Agent for Complainers. Mr Hamilton, Clerk. ANSWERS FOR WILLIAM GUTHRIE, Wri

Abstract
AI-generated
William Guthrie answers allegations from Michael Gilfillan and spouse, denying unauthorized distribution of summons and defending his conduct as agent.

Michael Gilfillan and Mrs Mary Bogle v. William Guthrie and Alexander Ure — Condescendence, 27 Nov 1823

Abstract
AI-generated
Complainers condescend to specify facts and evidence against respondents Guthrie and Ure, while sustaining interdict against others and ordering return of summonses.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 375
  • Page 376
  • Page 377
  • Page 378
  • Current page 379
  • Page 380
  • Page 381
  • Page 382
  • Page 383
  • …
  • 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