Subject_1 ADJUDICATION and APPRISING. Subject_2 Of the DEBT which is the FOUNDATION of the DILIGENCE.
Margaret Crawford v. Oliphant of Condy
1685.
March. Case No. No 12.
A widow, who had right to the fee of a sum, leads an apprising, including some annualrents, which were in bonus of her deceased husband. This occasioned the apprising, to be found incapable of expiring. She had not deducted some partial payments, made to an assignee; on this account, the apprising restricted to a security.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
An apprising, led at the instance of a wife, who had right to the fee of the sum apprised for, being quarrelled as null, because she had apprised for the bygone annualrents, which were in bonus of her deceased husband; and 2do, She having formerly assigned the debt, before she was retrocessed, the assignee had uplifted some part of the sum.
Answered: 1mo, The husband's representatives, claim no interest in the bygone annualrents; and the wife would fall to a greater share by the husband's testament; 2do, The creditor in the apprising, is willing to restrict to the sum uplifted.
The Lords found it relevant, to make the apprising current, but not to prejudge accumulations, &c.: That the annualrents apprised for, were in bonus defuncti; but found the second allegeance, viz. That the assignee had uplifted a part of the annualrent apprised for, before the compriser was retrocessed, relevant to take off the accumulations, and to make the apprising subsist, only as a security, for principal sum, current annualrents, and necessary expences.
