Colonel Robert Monro of Foulis, v. John Touch of Logiereich
Date: 15 July 1724 Case No. No 12.
It was objected to an adjudication, that tho’ the superiors were named in the against of the decreet, yet there was no conclusion in the libel against them for infefting the adjudger; and therefore the horning against them was without warrant, and consequently the charter and infeftment were null. The Lords repelled the objection.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Colonel Monro having adjudged certain lands belonging to the deceased Alexander Baine from Mr Daniel Baine his son, as charged to enter heir to him, insisted in a reduction of an adjudication in the person of the defender, upon this ground, That the sums in it were satisfied and paid by his and his author's intromissions; and, in order to keep the legal open, the following nullities were objected; 1mo, That it appeared from the decreet that the summons was not called by the clerk, in order to its being enrolled; for, though it bore, that the parties were often called by a macer, yet that could only be understood of the calling before the Ordinary. 2do, That though the superiors were named in the against of the decreet, yet there was no conclusion in the libel against them for infefting the adjudger; and therefore, the raising horning against them was without any warrant, and consequently the charter, bearing to be in obedience to letters of horning, if there was no foundation for them, the charter and infeftment thereon were null.
The Lords repelled the nullities.
Reporter, Lord Grange.Act. Jo. Forbes.Alt. Ja. Boswell.Clerk, Dalrymple.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 185. Edgar, p. 83.
