Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a removing pursued by Adam and his curators against Fairholm, the defender defending himself by a tack, set by a minor with consent of his curators to him of the lands libelled; the Lords repelled the exception, in respect that the tack foresaid was set and consented to by curators, chosen by the minor since the first act of curatory was made, which first curators had not consented to that tack, and who being lawfully and orderly removed and discharged by a competent Judge; and which not being done, there could no other second act of curatory be made, nor no other curators of new again could be thereafter given to him; and therefore the said tack being subscribed by another new chosen curator, and not consented unto by the curators chosen by the first act; the Lords repelled the exception, and found the tack null, as wanting the consent of the first chosen curators standing, unremoved; but this was received ope replicæ, without necessity of reduction, against a tack clad with possession, and consented to by curators, conform to an act of curatory standing unreduced.
