A decree obtained against a curator by a minor for liberation of the curator from his office was found not to liberate the curator from the office, even for omissions after the decree.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Scot of Braidmeadow pursues Scot of Thirlstoun, his curator, for count and reckoning; who alleged, Absolvitor, because the pursuer having convened the defender, before the Sheriff, to count and reckon, and to renounce his curatory, he was then decerned to renounce the office, and did count for by-gones. The pursuer answered, No respect to that decree, because it was during his minority; in which time the defender had a competent defence, that he was not countable; and for the renunciation of the office, it was a great lesion to the pupil, which the curator should not have yielded to, but proponed a defence against the same, that he could not pursue his curator to renounce, unless he had condescended, and instructed malversation. The defender answered, That he had just reason to suffer sentence, because his pupil was irregular, and meddled with his own rents by force, and mispent the same.
The Lords, notwithstanding of the decree, ordained count and reckoning; and found, that the decree could not liberate the curator, even for his omissions after, but reserved to the defender, before the auditor, to condescend what deeds the pupil had done before, as being relevant pro tanto.
