SCOS Archive | The University of Virginia Law Library

Abstract

Answers by Edward Hoggan to the summons of declarator of marriage at the instance of Euphemia Craigie, denying any marriage or acknowledgment of wife status.

Abstract

AI-generated

Defender seeks to alter interlocutors to uphold defenses, challenge commissary’s refusal to allow testimony, and recover expenses.

Abstract

AI-generated

Court dismisses appeal on witness examination, finds parties married based on equivocal letters, orders cohabitation and expenses, enrolls aliment claim.

Abstract

AI-generated

Trustees seek preference over reclaimers' arrestment on debtor's debts, but court rejects preference and grants reclaimers priority and expenses.

Abstract

AI-generated

Lord Ordinary rules Eliott's trustees ranked primo loco for annuity bond, Yates & Macallan ranked pari passu on £30,000 bond, and expenses awarded to Yates & Macallan.

Abstract

AI-generated

Creditors reject original trust terms; committee proposes amendments including £700 annuity, £30,000 bond, and creditor oversight; Sir William executes revised deeds with creditor ratification.

Abstract

AI-generated

Trustees seek preference over creditors Yates and Macallan on bond proceeds and annuity arrears, challenging validity of adjudication and diligence.

Abstract

AI-generated

Trustees claim preference over farm rents via personal and annuity bonds against Sir William Eliott, while opposing claimants contest diligence and bond scope.

Abstract

AI-generated

Trustees seek preference over creditors via post-bond adjudications; annuity arrears also contested.

Abstract

AI-generated

Trustees executed supplementary trust and bonds to secure creditors' claims, but later adjudicated personal bond as absolute obligation, conflicting with prior creditor arrangements.

Subscribe to

Euphemia Craigie v. Edward Hoggan — Answers, 26 Nov 1834

Edward Hoggan, Esq. Writer to the Signet,— Defender ; in the Action of Declarator of Marriage against him at the instance of Elizabeth Craigie, now or formerly residing in Albany Street, Edinburgh,—Pursuer

Reclaiming Note, Edward Hoggan against Lord Fullerton's Interlocutors

RECLAIMING NOTE FOR JOSEPH BROOKS YATES, Esq. of Liverpool, and David Crichton Briggs, Esq., Accountant in Edinburgh, his Mandatory, and James Macallan, W.S.; IN THE PROCESS OF MUL

RECLAIMING NOTE, YATES & MANDATORY, &c. AGAINST Lord Moncreiff's Interlocutor. AINSLIE, MACALLAN, & GRAHAM, W.S., Agents for Mr Macallan. T. S. FAIRLY, Agent for Mr Yates & Mandato

Brodies v. Yates — State of the Process

Brodies v. Yates — Revised Case, 21 Jun 1837 [2]

REVISED CASE FOR Sir James Boswell, Bart. of Auchinleck, Sir George Sinclair of Ulbster, Bart. and James Brown, Esq. Accountant in Edinburgh, Trustees under a Trust-Disposition mad

Brodies v. Yates — Interlocutor, 4 Jul 1837

Additional State-ment for J. Mac-allan, W.S. ; and Answers for Sir W. Elliott's Trustees.