Dispute in court over boundary stone



An extensive litigation, involving an apparently small issue, has been raised in the Dunfermline Sheriff Court at the instance of Wm. Fotheringham, retired market gardener, Cairneyhill, against John Drummond, some time contractor, 7 South Inglis Street, Dunfermline, and now residing at Cairneyhill.

The pursuer craved the Court to ordain the defender to restore a march stone [boundary stone] lying between the properties of the parties which the alleged defender had illegally removed. It was averred by the defender that the stone was entirely within his own ground, and that in removing it he acted within his rights.

Sheriff Umpherston was yesterday occupied the whole day hearing evidence. Placed on the solicitors’ table was the stone over which all the both was about. The point of dispute was in regard to the position which the stone occupied before being removed by the defender.

His Lordship made avizandum [that is, a judge’s decision to consider case privately before giving judgment].

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: