[1632] Mor 12515
Subject_1 PROOF.
Subject_2 DIVISION III. Public Instrument, how far Probative.
Subject_3 SECT. III. Instrument of Sasine.
Date: Hamilton
v.
Dundonald
25 January 1632
Case No.No 389.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The pursuer being seased upon a precept of clare constat, expressed in the bearing to be granted to the pursuer by the Master of Abercorn, as Commissioner,
and having power for that effect by the Earl of Abercorn his brother; and the defender alleging, That no process should be granted on that sasine so proporting, while the warrant thereof were produced, seeing it was but the assertion of a notary, which ought not to have faith uninstructed, no more than if any stranger, not having right, had given such a precept; and the pursuer replying, That this sasine was sufficient, without further production against this defender, who was a naked tenant, having no right at all;—the Lords found no process, while the precept and commission whereto the sasine was relative, were produced. Clerk, Gibson.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting