BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Helen Hill v Lauchlane Macleine of Lochburie. [1663] 2 Brn 317 (3 December 1663)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1663/Brn020317-0605.html
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER, LORD FOUNTAINHALL.
Helen Hill v. Lauchlane Macleine of Lochburie
Date: 3 December 1663
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Murdoch Macleine of Lochburie, by his bond, binds, obliges him to content and pay to Helen Hill, relict of Jo. Maxwel, burgess in Glascow, the sum of L.800. In anno 1657, she registrates the bond and raises letters of horning there-upon. He suffering himself to be denounced, she obtains letters of caption: by which having apprehended him, he grants her a bond of corroboration of the said sum, with this addition, that if he did not thankfully pay her betwixt and Martinmas 1657, that then he should enter himself prisoner immediately to the governor of Divart, and that under the pain of L.500. He neither pays it within the term of payment, nor does he enter his person, according to his engagement, but dies a little after. His brother Lauchlane Macleine serves and retours himself heir to him. Helen Hill, (who married afterwards Mr. William Weir, advocate,) she pursues Lauchlane Macleine now of Lochburie, to make payment to her of the sums contained in the bond of corroboration; and, for instructing the summons, produces the bond corroborated, the bond of corroboration, letters of horning, and caption, together with an extract of a service under the subscription of Mr. Archibald Nisbet notary, bearing Laughlan M'Laughlan, [1auchlane Macleine?] to have been heir served and retoured to his brother, before the four ordinary maissers, in January, 1663.
All which the Lords having considered, they decerned the defender to make payment of the said bond: because, albeit, the time of litiscontestation in the said matter, it was alleged by the defender's procurator, that he ought and should be simpliciter assoilyied from the said summons, because he offered him to prove paid: which allegeance the Lords admitted as most relevant, and therefore assigned him a term for proving thereof, which he failyied to do; so that the term was circumduced against him, and protestation admitted in favours of the pursuers, and decreet given as is above written.
Act. Mr. Robert Burnet.Alt. Mr. George Mackeinzie.
Signet MS. No. 20, fol. 7.
