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

H. J. Williams and others v. Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company — Answers, 7 Dec 1829

Abstract
AI-generated
Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company answers protest by H. J. Williams et al., denying director misconduct and asserting partner approval of all actions.

H. J. Williams and others v. Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company — Answers, 7 Dec 1829 [2]

Abstract
AI-generated
Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company answers protest alleging defective partnership contract and mismanagement.

Robert Sclater and Others v. David Clyne — Revised Case, 28 Nov 1829

Abstract
AI-generated
Pursuers, partners of The Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company, claim unpaid stock instalments from defender, a solicitor, who denies liability and challenges the validity of the company's actions and his own status as a partner.

Robert Sclater v. David Clyne — Reclaiming Note, 9 Jun 1830

Abstract
AI-generated
Defender seeks absolution from claims by Caledonian Iron and Foundry Company pursuers, challenging validity of contract, lack of evidence, and procedural defects.

David Clyne against Lord Fullerton's Interlocutor

Abstract
AI-generated
Court holds defender liable for unpaid stock instalments under copartnery contract dated Oct 1824, rejecting his objections to title and execution.

Robert Sclater, Die-Cutter in Edinburgh, and Others v. David Clyne, S.S.C. — Reclaiming Note, 11 Jan 1831

Abstract
AI-generated
David Clyne files reclaiming note against Lord Fullerton’s interlocutor over capital forfeiture in a dissolved joint-stock foundry company’s winding-up dispute.

Patrick Murray of Ayton and John Murray of Lintrose v. Alexander Tait — Information, 14 Nov 1762

Abstract
AI-generated
Trustees seek to enforce a bill against factor Alexander Tait for unpaid rents, resisting Lady Murray and Lady Dunbar’s claims under a 1749 agreement that only binds heirs if the estate devolves to them.

Thomas Dundas of Fingask v. Peter Leslie-Grant — Answers, 2 Nov 1762

Abstract
AI-generated
Answers by Peter Leslie-Grant, eldest Son of Captain John Grant, to the petition of Thomas Dundas of Fingask, Esquire, responding to the argument that the first moiety of the 1761 crop rent should not be sequestrated.

William Anderson late Tenant in Beilgrange v. The Right Honourable John Lord Belhaven — Information, 14 Sep 1762

Abstract
AI-generated
William Anderson claims the South-east Park road is public and the pre-tenancy dyke isn’t covered by the tack clause.

John Lord Belhaven v. William Anderson — Information, 24 Aug 1762

Abstract
AI-generated
Information of John Lord Belhaven, arguing that William Anderson's allegations of perjury and prevarication upon oath are unfounded and improperly framed.

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 444
  • Page 445
  • Page 446
  • Page 447
  • Current page 448
  • Page 449
  • Page 450
  • Page 451
  • Page 452
  • …
  • 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