Legal Subject: Rents |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cockburn v. Duncan | 1802 | Heritage, Rents, Deeds | Janet Cockburn Haldane, Margaret, Euphemia and Elisabeth Haldane, daughters of Mr. George Haldane, brought an action to recover the payments and rents over the lands of Geneagles. George Haldane had inherited the real estate from his uncle Robert Haldane by virtue of a deed of tailzie and bonds of provision. The defendant, Viscount Duncan, argued that the pursuers’ allegations were unsupported because Robert Haldane has given to him the right over those properties. |
| Purdie v. Lord Swinton's Interlocutor | 1788 | Debt, Aliment, Succession, Adjudication, Interest, Rents | Thomas Purdie petitioned the Court to alter Lord Swinton's recent interlocutor entered against him and to find that no expenses were due. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| Robertson v. Robertson and Miller | 1782 | Rents, Debt, Aliment, Arrestment, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration | This case involved a dispute over bills obtained as payment at a debtor’s auction. David Miller, one of the defenders, was a tenant of Major General John Scott of Balcomie. After General Scott died, William Robertson, the pursuer, became the factor for Scott’s minor children. In this capacity, William obtained a warrant to sell Miller’s crops, stock, and farm implements as payment and security for overdue rent. An auction was held, giving rise to a dispute over certain bills that were collected as payment for crops. The bills in question had been given by Miller to one Thomas Robertson, his man of business and creditor. William Robertson sued Miller and Thomas Robertson for possession of the bills. Although Thomas Robertson eventually handed them over, he and Miller were found jointly liable for the balance of rent due, plus litigation expenses. William Robertson argued that this was just, because they had wrongfully deprived him of security for the rent. Miller and Thomas Robertson raised different arguments in response: Miller argued that he was entitled to certain deductions from the rent claimed by William Robertson, while Thomas Robertson argued that he was not a tenant and had not otherwise bound himself to pay the rent. Both Thomas and Miller argued that they should not be found liable for expenses. |
Documents discussing this subject (31)
- Alexander Thomson v. John Miller — Reclaiming Note, 9 Mar 1827 [2]
- Allan MacLean v. Thomas, Earl of Elgin and John Sutherland of Fodbank — Memorial, 8 Oct 1812
- Andrew Zuill v. Thomas Bryce — Reclaiming, 15 May 1833
- APPENDIX.
- APPENDIX. Containing accounts, shewing the amount of the charge against Kilravock on the minute 1733, as at Candlemas 1758, in two different views. Account I. Shewing the amount of
- APPENDIX. EXTRACT LETTER, J. Vans Agnew, Esq. to H. S. Vans, Esq. EXTRACT LETTER, H. S. Vans, Esq. to J. V. Agnew, Esq.
- APPENDIX. No. I. RENTAL, Crop 1794. RENTAL, Crops 1795 and 1796, the same as above.
- Archibald Hamilton v. Mrs. Eupham Hamilton — Information, 24 Jul 1758
- David Scott v. John Fothringham — Reclaiming Note, 19 Feb 1858
- EUL0281 doc0069b
- I-1633-1757 doc0019
- James, Duke of Roxburghe v. John Wauchope — Appendix to Answers, 20 May 1822
- John Aitchefon v. Thomas Hopkirk and others — Minute, 11 Feb 1775
- Mrs Anna Wedderburn Ogilvy and Peter Wedderburn Ogilvy v. James Lawson — Duplies, 18 Feb 1828
- Mrs Euphame Hamilton v. Mr Archibald Hamilton — Information, 1 Aug 1758
- Mrs Rebecca Hog and Thomas Lashley v. Thomas Hog — State of the Process, 2 Feb 1792
- Mrs. Mary Sutherland v. Sir John Gordon of Embo — Answers, 18 Nov 1746 [2]
- Petition — George Binny against Lord Balgray's Interlocutor
- Petition — George Wilson Bowman against Lord Methven's Interlocutors
- Petition — Mrs Eupham Hamilton, Executrix qua nearest in Kin to the deceased Miss Marion Hamilton of Rosehall, and of her Husband for his Interest
- Purdie v. Lord Swinton's Interlocutor — Petition, 16 Dec 1788
- REC. NOTE—J. LOW'S TRUSTEES, AGAINST Lord Medwyn's Interlocutor. C. F. Davidson, W. S. Defenders' Agent. Jas. Burness, S. S. C. Pursuer's Agent. Mr. Fergusson, Clerk.
- RECLAIMING NOTE FOR MRS. ISOBEL BETHUNE MORISON of Naughton, and MISS LILLIAS MAXWELL, residing in Dundee, and for the said Mrs. Isobel Bethune Morison; and Miss Lillias Maxwell, a
- Reclaiming Note, James Ritchie against Lord Jeffrey's Interlocutor
- REVISED NOTE of PLEAS in LAW for Philip Rundell, John Bridge, and Others, with reference to the Revised Condescendence lodged by them in the PROCESS of MULTIPLEPOINDING at the inst
- Robert Mill v. Earl of Mar and Kellie — Appendix, 27 Jun 1836
- Rollo v. Irving and Others — petition, 8 Jul 1801
- STATEMENT of FACTS for the Respondents, and ANSWERS thereto for the Pursuer.
- The Principal and Professors of the College of Glasgow v. Dunbar Earl of Selkirk, Sir William Miller of Glenlee, Baronet, and Janet Stirling, Daughter of the deceased William Stirling, Merchant in Glasgow — Answers, 25 Jun 1793
- William Baillie Kennedy Lawrie v. James Donald and George Charles Jones — Revised Case, 26 Apr 1832
- William MacKenzie Merchant and John Lawson Mason v. William Park — Answers, 15 Oct 1763
