Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL Subject_2 SUMMER SESSION. 1687 and 1688.
M'Lurg of Ballantrae v. Boyd of Pinkill
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
1687. December 10.—A comprising was craved to be reduced, as executed against the debtor at; whereas he truly then dwelt at Edinburgh. The Lords having taken probation, they found, though he was then at Edinburgh, yet that he had focum et larem, and a family where he was cited; and therefore sustained the execution; but prorogated the legal of the apprising till Whitsunday next, if the debtor redeemed betwixt and then. Vide 16th February 1688.
Vol. I. Page 489.
1688. February 16.—Mr James Hunter, advocate, and James Cleland, merchant, as creditors to Boyd of Pinkill, gave in a bill, showing, that John Blair, as assignee by M'Lurg, had a comprising on Pinkill, which the Lords had declared should be irredeemable, if it should not be redeemed betwixt and Whitsunday 1688, (as mentioned supra, 10th December 1687;) and if Pinkill suffered that term to elapse, they would be cut off: and therefore craved the Lords would allow them, as posterior creditors, to pay Blair, et intrare ejus locum, and ordain him to assign them to his right; which he refused to do, because they would not pay him another sum Pinkill owed him, for which he had no comprising.
The Lords, from a principle of material justice, granted the desire of this bill: which was thought as extraordinary and singular, as the foresaid case of prorogating an expired comprising.
