Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The infeftment of lands being reduced against the proprietor thereof, the reducer using warning against the possessors, it will neither be necessary to him to warn the party whose infeftment was reduced, if he had not possession, neither will the subaltern infeftments, granted by him whose right is reduced, defend in the removing, those to whom they were granted, albeit they were not called in the reduction.
In this case was remembered, a practick passed between my Lord Chancellor and the Sheriff of Murray, wherein the Sheriff's infeftment being reduced upon a clause irritant, and the Chancellor warned Coliburne, son to Andrew Coliburne, who defending himself by infeftment granted to him by his father, who was infeft by the Sheriff, his allegeance was repelled, in respect of the reduction of the Sheriff's infeftment, albeit Andrew Coliburne, who was heritably infeft, and in possession, was not called thereto.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 350. Haddington, MS. No 1780.
*** Similar cases were decided, 4th June 1611, Bishop of St Andrews contra His Vassals, No 137. p. 6714, voce Improbation, and 13th July 1613, Laird of Polwarth, No 5. p. 9057. voce Minor non Tenetur.
