In which circumstances intromission does or does not infer a Passive Title. - Action transmits against heirs in valorem only.
Cochran v. Sturgeon
Date: 20 March 1624 Case No. No 146.
Found contrary to the above.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the action pursued by James Cochran, burgess of Edinburgh, against Helen Sturgeon, as intromissatrix with the goods of her umquhile husband, for payment of a debt owing by her husband to the pursuer;——the Lords sustained the action against the relict as intromissatrix, notwithstanding that she alleged that there were executors confirmed, in respect that they were not confirmed before the raising of the principal summons in this cause and before the execution thereof, albeit they were confirmed before the day of compearance, to the which the defender was summoned; which was found not to be sufficient, albeit the Commissaries in their judicatories admit confirmations, before litiscontestation, to be sufficient to liberate persons convened as intromitters, which is not received before the Lords: And where the defender would have purged his intromission, being condescended to be of wares in her husband's merchant booth in the town of Dunse, where he dwelt, such as pepper and spices, and such like other wares, which she alleged were sold by her, for the supply and necessary entertainment of herself and her bairns in meat and drink, having no other means wherewith to entertain them; the same was not sustained, but the Lords found that she was answerable, as intromissatrix, to the pursuer, for his debt owing by her husband.
Act. Nicalson, younger.Alt. Miller.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 41. Durie, p. 121.
