BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Goodlet v Adamson. [1628] Mor 9737 (22 November 1628)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1628/Mor2309737-082.html Cite as:
[1628] Mor 9737
A sentence of Court within burgh, whereby the defender was recognosced by testimony of witnesses, to be eldest son and heir to the defunct, was found not to prove him to be heir passive.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action Goodlet against Adamson, one being convened as heir to his father, and for verifying him to be heir, a sentence and ward of court of the town of Glasgow being produced, whereby he was recognosced in their court, by testimony of witnesses, to be eldest son and heir to the defunct; this act was found not to prove him to be heir, albeit it was used to prove passive against him; seeing there was no sasine following upon the said act given to the defender produced in this process; for, without sasine had followed upon the act, the same alone was found not to prove, likeas the defender was minor the time of that act; but that was not the cause of the decision, seeing the act stood against him, if it had been otherways in itself lawful, for it was alleged that he had then curators. See Proof.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 33. Durie, p. 400.*** Spottiswood reports this case:
In an action of registration pursued by N. Goodlet against John Adamson, as heir to his father, the pursuer produced to verify the defender to be heir, an act of court of the Bailies of St Andrews, bearing, that, by sentence and ward of court, John Adamson was recognosced to be heir to his father James, whereupon the said John's procurator asked instruments.—The Lords thought not this sufficient to prove one heir, thereby to infer any action against him.
