Expens in a Suspension. - A Party become personally liable by suspending, though not formerly.
Robertson v. Greig
Date: 28 November 1632 Case No. No. 38.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Greig pursues before the Sheriff of Perth, one Robertson, for the mails and duties of a room alleged pertaining to the said Greig in life-rent, whereupon the said Greig obtained decreet in foro contradictorio. Robertson suspends, alleging, that this decreet was wrongously given out against him, because his father was heritably infeft in the said land, to the which infeftment the said pursuer had consented. It was answered, Ought to be repelled in respect of the decreet given in foro contradictorio, where this defence was competent and omitted. It was replied, That if any procurator compeared before the Sheriff, he had no warrant of the party, by reason the suspender's right was so clear, and nothing would be alleged in the contrary, and that the parties were poor folks. The Lords would not put the suspenders to a reduction, but suspended the letters simply, and ordained to give to the charger 100 merks of expenses, and to give action against the procurator, if he compeared, but a warran. This was thought hard and against form.
