State in which the person who removes is bound to leave the property.
Lord Yester v. Murray
Date: 15 December 1630 Case No. No 128.
In conformity with the above.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
My Lord Yester, by virtue of a gift of Drummelzier's liferent, warns the tenants of the west side of the Mains of Drummelzier, before Whitsunday 1629, and obtained decreet in October 1630. David Murray of Halmyre alleging him to be infeft in the said lands, makes warning to the said tenants before Whitsunday 1630, and, in January 1630, the said tenants remove, and David Murray enters to his possession. My Lord Yester, by virtue of the said gift of Drummelzier's liferent escheat, had been in possession, by uplifting the mails and duties of the said lands diverse years before the warning, and pursues David Murray, as succeeding in the place of James Chisholm the tenant. He defends himself by his alleged infeftment and warning, and entered to the possession left void by the tenant. The Lords repelled the exception, by reason the tenant could not enter another man in his possession but the master, to whom he had been in use to pay duty before the warning.
