A father and son were cited in an improbation, whereon certification was granted, but before extracting the father deceased. No necessity for transferring against the son.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
There being an improbation pursued at the instance of Charles Maitland of Hatton against his vassals, whereof William Douglas, elder, of Over Gogar, and Alexander, his son, were galled, certification was granted contra non producta, in July last, conditionally, that what they should produce before the 10th of this instant, should be received; after which diet, an extract of the certification being craved, it was alleged for the son, That he being only cited to produce such writs as he had of the said lands libelled, or which his author had, to whom he was a singular successor, certification could only be extracted as to these writs; but as to any other writs he had from his predecessors, to which he had right jure sanguinis, the certification being granted against his father, who before the extracting was dead, the process should be transferred in statu quo against the said Alexander, his son. This allegeance was repelled, and the Lords found there was no necessity for transferring, because the son was called ab initio, and the certification was given against the father only. They assigned a long day, in respect that his father was but lately dead, and in the meantime discharged the extracting of the certification.
