Subject_1 EXHIBITION AD DELIBERANDUM. Subject_2 SECT. II.
Who liable to Exhibit? - No interest to call for Writs where the Defunct was Denuded. - Ought to be no conclusion for Delivery, nor for Count and Reckoning.
Steil v. Thomas
Date: 12 January 1665 Case No. No 19.
In an exhibition ad deliberandum, the defender produced comprisings to show that the pursuer's predecessor was denuded. It was alleged they were paid. The Lords ordained the defender to exhibit, reserving his defence against delivery.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Catharine Steil, as apparent heir to her father and goodsire, pursues John Thomas for exhibition of the writs of certain tenements ad deliberandum. In which action there being a defence proponed, that her father and her goodsire were denuded, and the defender and his predecessors had possest the said tenements as heritors these 40 or 50 years bygone, the Lords, before answer, ordained the defender to produce such writs as he had, to prove that they were denuded, and according to the ordinance the defender produced only some comprisings for very small sums; which sums, the comprisers and others having right from them, did receive, and were fully satisfied by their intromission before the legal expired, as was alleged. Likeas, the evidents pertaining to the pursuer's predecessors, were in the hands of Alexander Yule their uncle, and after his death John Meikle taylor meddled with them, from whom the defender without the pursuer's knowledge or consent received them.
The Lords ordained the defender ante omnia to exhibit all such writs as he had concerning the tenements libelled, reserving all defences against the delivery.
