Subject_1 QUOD AB INITIO VITIOSUM. Subject_2 SECT. IV.
Making up Titles ex post facto.
Elspit Tennant v. William Auchinleck
Date: 26 June 1627 Case No. No 42.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a removing pursued by Elspit Tennant against William Auchinleck, excepted, No process upon her sasine, because long after the warning. Replied, That it proceeded upon a retour, which was before the warning, and so should be drawn back. The Lords found the exception relevant, in respect that the sasine was not till the February after the warning; whereas if it had been shortly after Whitsunday (or any time before Martinmas) they use Commonly to draw it back to the retour and sustain it.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 304. Spottiswood, (Removing.) p. 281.*** Auchinleck reports this case:
1627. June 27.—In an action of removing pursued upon a warning made before Whitsunday 1626, it is not to be sustained, by reason sasine is not taken till February 1627, notwithstanding that the sasine proceeds upon a retour passed before the warning; for the Lords found the sasine could not be drawn back to the retour after two terms passed.
