Donoghue v Stevenson

Textual versions of document images

Donoghue v Stevenson – Appeal Papers – Die Jovis 26 Maii 1932, Note and Reclaiming Note

Reclaiming Note Page 8

View an image of the original document

  8
No. 5 of Pro.

4. — PLEAS IN LAW for DEFENDER.

    1. The pursuer's averments being irrelevant and insufficient to support the conclusions of the Summons, the action should be dismissed.

    2. The pursuer's averments, so far as material, being unfounded in fact, the defender should be assoilzied.

    3. The pursuer not having suffered any injury through the fault of the defender, he should be assoilzied.

    4. In any event the sum sued for is excessive.

In respect whereof,

J. L. CLYDE.


5. — INTERLOCUTORS.

No. 2 of Pro.

    21st May 1929. — LORD MONCRIEFF. — Act. — Gibson — Alt. — Clyde. — The Lord Ordinary continues the adjustment of the Record till Wednesday 5th June 1929.

ALEX. MONCRIEFF.

    5th June 1929. — LORD MONCRIEFF. — Act. Gibson. — Alt. The Lord Ordinary allows the Record to be amended in terms of Minute for pursuer, No. 7 of process: Appoints the Record, as amended, to be served, along with a notice in the form contained in Appendix, C.A.S., B. L. 5. upon Francis Minchella, Wellmeadow Café, Wellmeadow Place, Paisley; and allows him to lodge Defences, if so advised, within ten days after such service: Continues the adjustment of Record till Tuesday 25th June curt.

ALEX. MONCRIEFF.

Reclaiming Note Page 8