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

William Rattray and William Alexander v. Thomas Stewart — Answers, 24 May 1802

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by Thomas Stewart, Merchant in Leith, to the petition of William Rattray and William Alexander, responding to their claim that the oats delivered were not of the agreed quality.

APPENDIX TO THE PETITION of WILLIAM RATTRAY and WILLIAM ALEXANDER, printed by order of Court. No. I. LETTERS, Mr THOMAS STEWART to Mr WEIGENT.

Abstract
AI-generated
Petitioners allege breach of contract by seller failing to deliver oats as agreed, with correspondence showing disputes over vessel arrival and market timing.

Petition — William Rattray against Lord Hermand's Interlocutor [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Petitioners challenge an interlocutor in a grain purchase dispute, claiming delivered cargo failed to match the agreed sample.

Thomas Stewart v. William Rattray and William Alexander — Answers

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by Thomas Stewart, Merchant in Leith to the condescendence of William Rattray and William Alexander, denying the relevancy and proof of their allegations

Thomas Stewart v. William Rattray and William Alexander — Condescendence

Abstract
AI-generated
Defenders offer to prove reliance on sample and assurances of quality, and allege breach by pursuer for failure to deliver oats as promised.

Petition — Thomas Stewart against Lord Hermand's Interlocutor [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of Thomas Stewart, Merchant in Leith, asking the Court to overturn Lord Hermand's interlocutor

Archibald Ewing v. Jonathan Anderson — Answers, 3 Sep 1801

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by Jonathan Anderson to the argument of Archibald Ewing, asserting that the pursuer abandoned the feu bargain and the defender is not bound to implement it.

Petition — Jonathan Anderson against Lord Cullen's Interlocutor [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Petition of Jonathan Anderson, asking the Court to overturn Lord Cullen's interlocutor in an action of implement concerning a feu bargain for lands of Cowlairs.

Petition — Magistrates of Irvine against Lord Polkemmet's Interlocutor

Abstract
AI-generated
Petitioners seek reversal of Lord Polkemmet’s interlocutor, contending Irvine grammar-school isn’t parochial and rector’s salary must be withheld pending resolution of his lawful dismissal.

Messrs John Campbell senior and Company v. Daniel Mackenzie — Answers, 7 Mar 1803

Abstract
AI-generated
Daniel Mackenzie, trustee for William Ewing’s creditors, sues John Campbell & Co. for breach of a 1800 agreement to pay £3000 from Hugh Douglas’s West Indies remittances, claiming contractual preference over other creditors.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 427
  • Page 428
  • Page 429
  • Page 430
  • Current page 431
  • Page 432
  • Page 433
  • Page 434
  • Page 435
  • …
  • 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