[1630] Mor 15215
Subject_1 TACK.
Subject_2 SECT. IV. In what Cases good against Singular Successors?
Date: Maxwell of Hills
v.
Tenants of Glessack
3 March 1630
Case No.No. 79.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Maxwell, compriser, pursuing for the mails and duties of the lands comprised, and the defenders defending with a tack set for 19 years, to begin after the ish of a preceding standing tack, then run out, but suspending the entry until a sum were paid to the tacksman by the setter of the tack, and which was unpaid, and which tack was clad with many years possession before the pursuer’s comprising; this tack was not found sufficient to defend against this pursuit for mails and duties, any more than it would defend against the removing, the same being pursued by a singular successor; and it being alleged, that the sum was paid to the tacksman, so that the time of the entry had begun, and so the tack was good for the rest of the 19 years since the time the sum was paid, this allegeance was also repelled, because the payment was made since the pursuer’s comprising, and so the entry of the tack was conferred in tempus indebitum, not having its entry before the comprising.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting