“Subject_Expenses.— Although a defender was assoilzied in respect of the pursuer's departing from the title set forth in his summons, yet held that it was not imperative on the Court to subject the pu…”
You're reading the free summary of White v Traill [1835] CA 13_886b (10 June 1835). Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.