Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
Mr John Hay of Woodcock v. Mr Robert Joussie of Westpans
Date: 5 January 1694
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr John Hay of Woodcock, as factor for the parish of Dalray, against Mr Robert Joussie of Westpans. The Lords repelled his first reason of suspension, that the decreet was null for want of an active title; seeing they proved, by his oath, that the codicil and testament were in his own hand, and left by him at London: as also repelled the second, viz. that the passive titles were not proven against him, seeing he proponed defences without denying them, and acknowledged intromission with his father's writs: And as to the third, that Robert Inglis, the coexecutor's representatives were not called, they repelled it also; in respect it appeared that Bailie Joussie, the defender's father, intromitted with all. The Lords only demurred on the fourth reason, that Bailie Joussie, by his oath, had not acknowledged intromission with the superplus estate left in the codicil; and, though it differed from the account he had given in, yet his son contended that the oath ought to be the rule of counting; and, therefore, the Lords declared they would hear them at advising the oath: for an executor is only liable for diligence in discussing the inventory; and when he is pursued by creditors or legators, he is only bound to assign.
