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

Lieut.-Colonel Alexander Grant of Redcastle v. Commissioners for making the Caledonian Canal — Answers, 10 Sep 1812 [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Commissioners of Caledonian Canal defend against petition for removal from quarry, arguing statutory right to possess and pay rent via jury, not court decree.

Petition — George Pentland against Lord Armadale's Interlocutor [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of George Pentland asking the Court to alter the interlocutor of Lord Armadale, which found him liable in expenses and remitted damages for carriages left exposed.

Answers — Ans.—James Duguid to the Pet.—Geo. Kinloch J. & T. Peat, Respondents' Agents

Abstract
AI-generated
Respondents challenge insurance claim, arguing petitioners and broker concealed material facts that invalidated the policy.

Petition — George Kinloch against Lord Robertson's Interlocutor

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of George Kinloch, William Sandeman, James Grubb, James Davidson, and Alexander Anderson, asking the Court to alter the interlocutor of Lord Robertson concerning insurance on the vessel Kinloch

Petition — Isabella and Janet Peters against Innerhouse Interlocutor

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of Isabella and Janet Peters, against Innerhouse Interlocutor

Rosina, &c. Lees v. Walter Ewing M'Lae — Answers, 18 Jun 1808 [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Walter Ewing, trustee for Murdoch, Robertson & Co., defends diligence against Rosina Lees’ petition, asserting debt validity and priority over competing claim.

Walter Ewing Maclae v. Rodger — 2 Aug 1794 [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Amendment seeks £1068 19s 7d plus interest from John Rodger’s heirs, referencing a 1785 bill and reserving rights to a prior 1783 £1000 bill.

APPENDIX. I. INGLIS and others, Assignees of Crane, a Bankrupt, against USHERWOOD.

Abstract
AI-generated
Crane’s assignees sued Usherwood for cargo value, arguing Russian law allowed consigners to reclaim goods if consignee became insolvent, despite formal delivery on chartered ship.

Petition — John Moyes, Master of the Margaret of Leith; and John Galloway Merchant in Leith, Owner, or part Owner, of said Vessel

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of John Moyes and John Galloway asking the Court to alter its recent interlocutor

Duncan Auld & Wood, Andrew M'Millan, Hugh Morris junior, and Joshua Senior v. John Moyes and John Galloway — Answers, 17 May 1805

Abstract
AI-generated
Respondents defend against claim for cotton goods delivered in Holland per Dutch law, asserting lawful compliance with foreign jurisdiction and exoneration via bill of lading.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 390
  • Page 391
  • Page 392
  • Page 393
  • Current page 394
  • Page 395
  • Page 396
  • Page 397
  • Page 398
  • …
  • 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