Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Subject_1 Process Subject_2 Proof Subject_3 Competency Subject_4 Diligence. Facts: In an action for reduction of a settlement on the ground of facility and circumvention, the Court (following the case of Livingstone v. Dinwoodie , June 28, 1860, 22 D. 1333 ) refused a diligence at the instance of the defenders to recover a diary containing entries by a body-servant of the testator with regard to his master's health and state of mind.
Counsel for Pursuers— Asher — D. Robertson . Agents— M'Neill & Sime , W.S.
Counsel for Defenders— Balfour — Mackintosh . Agents— Waddell & M'Intosh , S.S.C.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
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.