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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Jury Court Reports


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Jury Court Reports >> Stevenson v. Macpherson, Maclachlan, and Macnicol. [1827] ScotJCR 4_Murray_275 (11 June 1827)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotJCR/1827/4_Murray_275.html
Cite as: [1827] ScotJCR 4_Murray_275

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


SCOTTISH_HoL_JURY_COURT

Page: 275

(1827) 4 Murray 275

CASES TRIED IN THE JURY COURT, AT EDINBURGH, AND ON THE CIRCUIT, FROM DECEMBER 1825 TO JULY 1828.

No. 32


Stevenson

v.

Macpherson, Maclachlan, and Macnicol.

1827. June 11.

PRESENT, LORDS CHIEF COMMISSIONER AND Cringletie

Finding for the defender, the pursuer having failed to produce an original sederunt-book.

This was an action of damages by a person who had been bankrupt, and alleged that the trustee on his estate, and the agents employed by him, had agreed to reconvey to him the stock on his farm at a valuation, and afterwards sold it.

Defence.—The pursuer did not pay the price, or find security in terms of the agreement. Before, at, and after the sale, the pursuer, by his conduct, homologated every thing that was done.

Mr Robertson opened the case for the pursuer, and stated the facts.—The first piece of evidence tendered was a copy of the sederuntbook under the sequestration, which it was stated had been in process, and was admitted in the answers to the condescendence as a true

Page: 276

copy. This was objected to as neither the original, nor the copy authorized by the bankrupt act.

Lord Chief Commissioner.—In fact, by the statute there are two originals, but this is neither of them, and the admissions not having been taken in the usual way, this copy must be rejected. As this is the foundation of the pursuer's case, if I had the power to nonsuit, this would be a proper case to exercise it. But not having this power, I must direct a verdict for the defender.

Verdict—“For the defender.”

Counsel: Robertson, for the Pursuer.
Hope, Sol.-Gen., and D. M'Neill, for Macpherson and Maclachlan.

Monteith for Macnicol.

Solicitors: (Agents, Thomas Ker, w.s. David Brown, w.s. James Hamilton, w.s.)

1827


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotJCR/1827/4_Murray_275.html