Subject_1 ARRESTMENT. Subject_2 In whose hands Arrestments may be used.
Muirhead and M'Mitchell v. Miller
Case No. No 61.
An arrestment was not sustained, because used, not in the hands of him who was debtor to the common debtor, but in the hands of his factor.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action pursued by William Muirhead and Thomas M'Mitchell, burgesses of Edinburgh, against William Miller, as assignee to Alexander Williamson, it was found, That a decreet given against the said William Muirhead and Thomas M'Mitchell, their factors, in the town of Deik, at the instance of one Nicol Reid, who has obtained a sentence of 600 franks against Alexander Williamson, before the judges of London, and who by virtue of his sentence arrested in the said factors hands, the sum of 1100 franks, while they were appointed by the said William Muirhead and Thomas M'Mitchell, to deliver to the said Alexander Williamson, to be null and noways to defend the saids merchants against the said assignee, because Alexander Williamson was not summoned to the giving of the decreet, and because no arrestment could be made in the factors hands, of any sums of money addebted by the said Muirhead and M'Mitchell to Alexander Williamson, and whilk they were obliged to cause the saids factors deliver to the said Alexander, in the town of Deik; because the factors were not debtors to Alexander Williamson, but the merchants themselves, in whose hands no arrestment was made.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 57. Kerse, MS. (Arrestment.) fol. 234.
