previous

Legal Citations

next

Northoll v Pygyn (1500?)
This was a case heard at Gloucester about the price of hake (a sort of fish).
Plaintiff: John Northoll of Bristol
Defendant: Thomas Pygyn

Documented:

English National Archives C 1/1039/47
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office (Early Proceedings, Richard II to Philip and Mary).
There is no date in the PRO catalogue for this piece.
See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

A-G v Burton (1550)
Richard Pygyn was a juryman accused of corruptly or otherwise committing a transgression of justice. We do not know the outcome of this case.

Documented:

English National Archives STAC 3/6/69
In: Bundle VI, Court of Star Chamber: Proceedings (Edward VI) at Public Records Office, Kew.
Plaintiff: Henry Bradshaw, attorney-general
Defendant: Henry Burton, Richard Pygyn, William Sall, and others, a jury
Subject: Acquittal of Alexander Browne, indicted for petty larceny at Warwick.
County: Warwick
See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Pyggyn v Kythermyster (1558)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives, Chancery Proceedings (bill and answer) against Richard Kythermyster and another at or concerning Hampton, Herefordshire
Chancery Proceedings Series II 1558-1579, bundle 144, number 76
Listed under "William Pyggyn" in Index Volume I, p. 323
The PRO online catalogue gives a different bundle number: C 3/145/76 and only the title Pyggyn v Kythermyster; Hereford
The class is described online as "pleadings", series II

Piggen v Heydon Mil. (1558)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives C 21/P36/5
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office: Country Depositions, Series I
This is among 767 bundles (Covering Dates 1558 - 1649) containing depositions in cases on the equity side of Chancery taken by commissioners in the locality where the dispute had arisen. The class includes copies of commissions, interrogatories and abstracts of plaintiffs' bills of complaint.
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Patynson v Piggen (1591)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives C 3/247/90
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office: Pleadings, Series II, Patynson v Pekyn alias Piggen: Middlesex. A.D. 1591-1596
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Kirbie v Fountaine (1598)

Documented:

English National Archives E 134/41&42Eliz/Mich27
William Piggen was defendant in this case before the Court of Exchequer, King's Remembrancer
The document contains the depositions taken by commission, but the outcome of the case may no longer be documented
Case name: John Kirbie v Thomas Fountaine, William Piggen: Lease of a brewhouse or tenement in the parish of Lawrence Poultney, near the Old Swan in the city of London, sometime leased by Her Majesty to Thos. Fountaine, citizen and merchant taylor of London (gr...)
In PRO, Kew. See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Lawrence v Sansbury (1603)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives STAC 8/199/20
Court of Star Chamber: Proceedings, James I
Full case name: Lawrence v Sansbury, Salter, Whitacres, Welder, Seres, Salter, Pickin (Piggen), Cutteris (Coutrayes), Beedles and others
County: Bucks.
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Zouche v Zouche (1603)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case, but the surnames strongly suggest a link to the Heanor area.

Documented:

English National Archives STAC 8/311/30
Court of Star Chamber: Proceedings, James I
Full case name: Zouche v Zouche, Dracott, Thwaite, Hyde, Colecloughe, Cowper, Ward, Piggen, Cotes, Booker alias Strangwyse, Machin, Mobery, Boughton, Sympson and others.
County: Derby
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Gilbert v Piggin (1621)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case, though the Gilbert may be of the same family as that below (1663). English Origins offers an abstract service for this case, derived from Peter Coldham's index of 82,000 Chancery cases, taking about three weeks and costing 16 pounds.

Documented:

English National Archives C 3/353/7
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office: Pleadings, Series II: Gilbert v Piggin: Derby. A.D. 1621-1625
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Kinsley v Piggins (1630)
An ecclesiastical case in which Piggins was sued for defamation— for saying that Kinsley "did keep a man in his house to bugger". Subsequently, the Reverend Kinsley unsuccessfully tried to have the action he had brought dropped or, in the legal terminology of the times, prohibited. Kinsley, who has not yet been found in the database of Anglican clergy, presumably hoped to avoid even greater embarassment.

Cited by Gray as:

M. 6 Car. K.B. Harg. 39, f.133
(This source is Widdrington's Law Reports, folio 133, preserved in the Hargrave Manuscripts, volume 39, at the British Library. The citation indicates the case was heard in Michaelmas term of the 6th year of the reign of King Charles I before the Court of Kings Bench.)
Discussed in Gray, Charles M., The Writ of Prohibition: Jurisdiction in Early Modern English Law [New York, Oceana Publications, 1994, ISBN: 0-379-20072-4, 2nd (electronic) edition, Chicago, University of Chicago D'Angelo Law Library, 2004] at pages 168-171 of volume 1
Online at:
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/storage /law/2004/law2004-001-05.pdf

A-G ex rel Gilbert v Brecknocke (1663)
This case evidently deals with the farmers at Spondon, Derbyshire.

Documented:

English National Archives DL 4/107/16
Duchy of Lancaster: Court of Duchy Chamber: Pleadings, Depositions and Examinations, Series II
Full case name: Attorney-General by the relation of Henry Gilbert v Brecknocke, Carrington, Hollingworth, Heale, Piggin, Soare, Walker, Radford, Bradocke, Foxe, Bowes, Ollerenshawe, Hudson, Locke alias Johnson, Crosse, Hollingsworth and others: Spondon Waste, Spondon: De...
Depositions 1663
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Hollingworth v Piggin (1667)
This was a Derbyshire dispute over money. There are additional unnamed defendants. Hollingworth appears in the 1663 case above, so these cases may be connected.

Documented:

English National Archives C 6/38/64
indexed in the Public Records Office's Equity Pleadings Database
Plaintiff: William Hollingworth
Defendant: Robert Piggin
See http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/equity/

Piggin v Dannald (1675)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives C 10/493/192
indexed in the Public Records Office Online Catalogue
place given: Lincoln
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks Office

R v Bracy, Piggen and others (1679)
Richard Piggen obtained a pardon at trial in Derby for being a highwayman because he gave evidence against his fellow accused, who were hanged.

Documented:

Chapbook in British Library

Greenwood and Piggon (1688)
Exchequer case, nothing else known. See also case of same name in 1728.

Citation:

Holt KB 55 (Holt's King's Bench Reports) and reprinted as 90 ER 929.

Piggin v Beere (no date given: period 1649-1714)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives C 22/889/15
Country Depositions, Series II: Six Clerk Division: Whittington
Note that a nearby piece, C 22/889/19, involves Pippin v Beere (one or other of these is likely to be a mistake).

R v Piggen (1694)
Richard Piggen was sentenced to death in October 1694 along with Samuel Sherwin for counterfeiting and clipping money. They were residents of Crown Alley in Upper Moorfields, London. Constable Eudall of Shoreditch searched their home and detained them. The implements were produced in court. Presumably Richard was the same person as the highwayman who had been pardoned 15 years earlier at Derby (above), but there is no confirmation of this in the document. It may even be that this fact was not known to the Old Bailey judge.

Documented:

Proceedings of the Old Bailey Ref: t16941010-22

Piggin v Sanderson (1698)
Apparently a dispute involving land at Ockbrook and Derby
The University of Nottingham Library Manuscripts and Special Collections
From the Catalogue of the Mellish Collection.
In section Deeds and Title Deeds, early 12th century to 1839:

Documented:

Me D 9/10 - Trinity Term 1689
Final Concord (2nd part): Piggin v Sanderson and others.
Locations: Ockbrook and Derby, Derbyshire.
Check also:
Me D 44-50 Wills and related papers, 1588-1799
Me D 51 Abstracts of Title
Extracted 1999/10 from http://mss.nott.ac.uk/cats/mellish_med.html
See also Derbyshire Records Office D5336/1/10/25 re contract for sale of land by Sanderson to Piggin 1686
Also Derbyshire Records Office D5336/2/22/19 re 1695 promissory note by Edward James to produce for Robert Piggin senior a deed relating to a sale by Thomas Sanderson of Ockbrook of house and property in Ockbrook

In re Piggin (1708)
Not clear which Chancery court heard this:

Documented:

Derbyshire Record Office has: Note of agreement between John Johnson, his wife Jane and Robert Wilson (Jane and Robert being executors of Robert Piggin) and Abraham Bennet, for monies collected by Bennet for Piggin, Source D5336/2/22/30 - date: 1707
Answers to queries by Mrs Piggin on Robert Piggin's inventory, Source D5336/2/22/31 - date: [1707]
Petition of Mary Piggin (widow of Thomas and mother of Robert Piggin) to the Lord Chancellor, relating to a case arising from Robert Piggin's will, Source D5336/2/22/33 - date: [1708]
Bond to abide by an arbitration, John Johnson to Marie Piggin of Radford (Nottinghamshire), widow, Source D5336/2/22/34 - date: 1708
Bill and answer in Chancery case relating to dispute over late Robert Piggin's property, Source D5336/2/22/42 - date: [early 18th century]

Burlington Earl v Piggen (1714)
Nothing is known yet about the Piggin or the issue of this case. Richard Boyle (1694-1753), 3rd Earl of Burlington, owned Yorkshire lands, was noted for introducing Palladian architecture to England and owned Burlington House in Piccadilly, London.

Documented:

English National Archives C 11/1831/16
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office: Pleadings 1714 to 1758:
Burlington Earl v Piggen: Zincke Division: Geo. II
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Greenwood and Piggon (1728)
A King's Bench Division case, nothing else known. See also case of same name in 1688.

Citation:

Skin 591 (Skinner's King's Bench Reports) and reprinted as 90 ER 265.

Johnson and Piggin v Harrison (1729)
Final concord of two messuages and land in Wilne, Shardlow, Aston upon Trent, Borrowash, Spondon and Ockbrook, Johnson and Piggin (plaintiffs) v. Harrison (deforciants)

Documented:

Derbyshire Record Office D5336/1/10/28

Goodyere v Piggin et al. (1737)
A case at Whitechapel in Hackney involving a complaint that John Piggin and others of the Parish of Bromley St Leonard had not fulfilled their legal obligations to maintain a highway. The justices, Henry Norris and Stephen Ram, issued a summons on the complaint from the surveyors, Thomas Goodyere and John Keene. The outcome is unknown.

Documented:

Hackney Petty Sessions Book: 1737 (No. 919), reproduced in Justice in eighteenth-century Hackney: The justicing notebook of Henry Norris and the Hackney petty sessions book, (1991), pp. 147-54. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/

Fox v Piggin (1739)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Documented:

English National Archives C 11/849/22
Court of Chancery: Six Clerks' Office: Pleadings 1714 to 1758
Winter Division, 1739
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

R v Piggen (1785)
Hannah Piggin was tried in Middlesex County in the colony of Massachusetts. She was sentenced to be hanged on a conviction for concealing birth.

Documented:

Rob Gallagher list of U.S. executions: 178 Piggen, Hannah. He does not state his source.

R v Piggin (1786)
Joseph Piggin was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 12th day of August, one cotton counterpane, value 3 s. the property of Thomas Harris. Found guilty of theft (simple grand larceny) 30 Aug 1786 and sentenced to seven years' transportation.

Documented:

Proceedings of the Old Bailey Ref: t17860830-39 (No. 699)
For a full description, see http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/

Wright v Piggin (1828)
Piggin was ordered to pay damages in a property dispute, but not Wright's court costs, and Wright prevailed on appeal in this exchequer case.
Piggin (first name not given) had been found liable to pay less than 40 shillings in damages for breaking and entering Wright's house (location not stated) and seizing, taking, carrying away and converting to his own use Wright's goods at a time when a few hours had still to run in "a term for years". Presumably this meant that landlord Piggin had ejected tenant White from the property one day too early. Justice Alexander admitted at the appeal that he had thought the case "a most improper action" and had sought to deprive White of his costs. Justice Garrow said, "We must, however, abide by the law."

Citation:

M.T. 1828. Ex. 2 Younge & J. 544 (alternatively 2 Y & J 544) (Younge & Jervis 1826-1830 is reprinted in the English Reports) at 148 ER 1034
In an action of trespass to the freehold and for taking goods, defendant pleaded, 1st, not guilty; 2nd, accord and satisfaction. The jury found a general verdict for the plaintiff with damages under 40s., and the judge certified the amount of damages under the stat. 43 Eliz.c.6, s.2. On a rule to show cause why the plaintiff should not have his costs, notwithstanding the certificate--
Per Cur.-- It is a general rule, that, wherever a defendant in an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, pleads a special plea, the issue joined upon which is found for the plaintiff, he, the plaintiff, shall have full costs, although the damages may be under 40s., and the judge shall not have certified that the title came in question at the trial. And the plaintiff's right to costs in such a case will not be affected by or depend upon the nature or facts of the special plea; for although such plea should not make title to the land mentioned in the declaration, or even be such a one as to preclude the possibility of bringing the title into question thereon, as for instance, a disclaimer of title, that the trespasses were involuntary, and tender of amends, or a licenses, the plaintiff will still be entitled to full costs, if he obtain a verdict on that plea. The principle of these determinations is, that where the case is such that the judge who tries the cause cannot, in any view of it, grant a certificate, it is considered to be a case out of the statute. From: Petersdorff, Charles. A practical and elementary abridgment of the common law as altered and established by the recent statutes, rules of court, and modern decisions Vol. 1. London, 1841-1844.
Also cited in: Chitty, Thomas. Archbold's Practice of the Court of Queen's Bench in personal actions and ejectment Vol. 2. London, 1838, 6th ed.
Alsc cited in: Tidd, William. Supplement to the Practice of the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas, &c. London, 1830, 10th ed.

Piggin v Cheetham (1842)
This is a case in which Piggin apparently foreclosed on a mortgage he had earlier extended to Cheetham. Curiously, there was a case two years later, Cheetham v Sturtevant (1844), which may also have involved the same Cheetham.

Citation:

2 Hare 80 (Hare is reprinted in the English Reports) as 67 ER 33

Commentary:

The judgement is interpreted in different ways by three separate legal authors:
An objection having been made by a plaintiff, whose bill contained the usual suggestion that the defendant had dealt with the equity of redemption, that a discovery of subsequent incumbrances was necessary for the safety of the title by forclosure, leave was given to the defendant to produce an affadavit upon the subject. From: Fisher, William Richard; The law of mortgage and other securities upon property; 2nd ed. Vol. 1. London, 1868. 2 vols.
Also: As soon as the defendant has entered his appearance, and before filing his answer, a notice of motion may be given for the usual reference to the Master to take an account of principal, interest and costs, the same order will be made as if the cause had been regularly heard. The order may be made without answer. Ayckbourn, Hubert; The new Chancery practice : comprising all the alterations effected by the new orders, 8th May, 1845 : with practical directions, a full ... 2nd ed., enl. and carefully rev. / by Thomas H. Ayckbourn and Hubert Ayckbourn. London, 1846. 571pp. British Law: Equity. Page 207.
Also: As soon as the defendant has entered his appearance, and before filing his anser, if he is desirous of redeeming, he is at liberty to give a notice of motion for the usual reference to the Master to take an account of principal, interest and costs... Smith, John Sidney. A treatise on the practice of the Court of Chancery : with an appendix of forms and precedents of costs, adapted to the last new orders. 3rd ed., rev. and enl. Vol. 1. London, 1844. 2 vols. The Making of Modern Law.

Piggins v Earl Brooke (1839)
Case heard before Court of Common Pleas, Guildhall, London Special Juries on 1839 July 5 according to The Times. Henry Richard Greville, 3rd Earl Brooke (1779-1853), owned Warwick Castle and was presumably a Midlands landowner. Why Piggins sued him is not known.

Dee, dem. Bull v Piggin (1850)
Case heard before Court of Exchequer, Westminster, Middlesex Common Juries on 1850 May 25 according to The Times. Nothing else is known of this case.

Piggin v Sills (1861)
An action in the High Court of Chancery concerning the administration of an estate in the Nottingham area: Frederick Piggin had sued Joseph Sills and others, the creditors of William Shaw, late of Stapleford, who had died in 1849. The defendants were ordered to prove their debts in 1862 (London Gazette) and the court ordered an auction of four pieces of land at Radford in 1864 (London Gazette). The two documents in the English National Archives are a set of receivers accounts and Master Chandler's papers on the case. The other extant documents refer to the chancery order for the sale of the property at Radford.

Court Papers:

English National Archives: C 30/2230 and C 30/2231 (1861 P 71)
? ?

Other Papers:

1864: Piggin v. Sills; Lot 3 at Radford, Whitehead asked to value property with reference to general situation in Radford; then 220 Wilson offers is refused. Carter & Son approach him in 1865 & he offers 180. (apparently declined). 6-9 Apr. 1864; 9-15 June ?
1864: Beerhouse ("Railway Tavern"), cottages & gardens at Old Radford. Sale under chancery order in Piggin v. Sills.
1864: Piggin v. Sills. Re. Wilson's purchase of 10 houses in Peter's St., Radford for 370;- re. purchase money & possession. Collection of rents held up by delay in paying off interest, - receipt for this enclosed (DD/WR/20/59)

Report in Print:

The Times on 1862, March 6, 7 and 10.

Collishaw v Jones (1862)
Stirtevant Piggin of Nottingham was among the defendants in this inheritance case before the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice. The London Gazette mentions a July 1862 sale of several plots of land in the heart of Nottingham in consequence of the case, stating that information about these could be obtained from Thomas Stanley Piggin ( -1913), the real estate agent.

Documented:

English National Archives J 68/296
Pedigree: Clarke, Kindness (D.1843)
Suit: Collishaw v Jones, Massey, Leaviss, Piggin, Redgate & Buttery
In PRO, Kew. www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
As far as can be established, the only official document extant is the pedigree sheet in a PRO document series: Pedigrees (Various Masters) (a series with Covering Dates 1852 - 1977 filed in connection with actions concerning the administration of wills and intestacies). The pedigree, sworn in 1862, only relates to the children of William Leaviss (-1852) and his wife Kindness Clarke (-1843), not to the Piggin family or the defendant Thomas Blatherwick Redgate. It is thus likely that Stirtevant Piggin was a minor beneficiary of a Leaviss will. The case was noticed in The Times on Friday, Jun 26, 1863, with a hearing that day in the Rolls Court, Chancery Lane.

Goodwin v Piggin (1863)
A Sheriffs Court case involving adulteration of milk. Piggin, a London milkman, contended that farmer Goodwin had watered the milk, but lost.

Citation:

The Times 1863 Jan 23

Piggins v Blackman (before 1876)
A (New Jersey?) case dealing with the legal concept of "state of demand": In an action to recover two-thirds of the amount of an execution, held by the plaintiff and the defendant, the state of demand must set out the interest of the plaintiff, and how the defendant is liable.

Citation:

2 Penn. 651
Cited in Honeyman, A.V.D. and H. Burdett Herr; A treatise on the jurisdiction of and civil and criminal proceedings in the Court for the Trial of Small Causes in New Jersey. Somerville, 1876

Re William Piggin's estate, Swift v Smith (1881)
Litigation involving the estate of William Piggin of Hose (who was killed by lightning). The Court of Chancery first required creditors to file claims against the estate to the solicitors of the plaintiff, Hilda Jane Cox, in 1882. Five years later, in 1887, the Long Clawson land was sold by auction at Melton. For some reason, part of the proceeds must have been withheld, because more than 50 years later they were unclaimed. A 1933 notice in the London Gazette reads: Probate 234 and lists dormant funds in court (chancery) where the unclaimed amount was at least 50 pounds: "Proceeds of sale of real estate. Account opened in 1887, order of 1888-07-28, last transaction (payment out) 1913-02-20."

Quoted in:

London Gazette, 1882, 1887, 1933.

In re Piggin. Ex parte Mansfield Railway Company (1913)
A further case involving costs for a sale of land from the estate of William Piggin, who had died 1880-07-26. It is likely that the dormant funds in court in the 1881 case listed above derive from the same estate. W.P. had owned land in Nottinghamshire, Nottingham itself and Leicestershire. He evidently did not leave his property to relations but shared it between two ladies, Maria Smith and Hilda Jane Cox. The latter had two children. The two ladies appear to have still been alive as these trusteeship arrangements dragged on decades later. The Mansfield Railway Company bought some of the land in 1913, presumably for a line or station. The will had been dated April 8, 1879 and this report refers to court orders in 1881 (administration), 1883 (further consideration), 1906 (further trustees) and 1912 (trustees).

Citation:

[1913] 2 Ch 326 at www.justcite.com

R v Piggin (1927)
The trial and conviction of William Ernest Piggin for demanding money with menaces from a clergyman. The case was extensively reported on in newspapers at the time. The court papers are filed at the English National Archives. In 2003, the Metropolitan Police correspondence was released: Office of the Commissioner: Correspondence and Papers, Special Series MEPO 3/371. Piggin was described as a "professional blackmailer" who had been paid more than 1400 during a 3-year period.

In re Toynton-Brown Co. (1944)
This Michigan case is the first of a series brought by Edward S. Piggins, the lawyer, following his 1943 appointment as receiver of the Toynton-Brown Company, a real-estate agency of Detroit. The first case was about the authority of arbitrators. In Fellinger v Wayne Circuit Judge, Fellinger failed to win an extension of time. In Piggins v Fellinger, the receiver managed to void a document, though Fellinger was allowed a greater rate of commission, and in Piggins v Marx, the receiver warded off another claim against funds of the company.

Citation:

In re Dissolution of Toynton-Brown Company
308 Mich. 727, 14 N.W.2d 550 (May 17, 1944)

Citation:

Fellinger v Wayne Circuit Judge
313 Mich. 289 (January 7, 1946)

Citation:

Piggins v Fellinger
318 Mich. 398, 28 N.W.2d 273 (June 27, 1947)

Citation:

National Bank of Detroit v Wing, Piggins v Marx
318 Mich. 436 (June 27, 1947) and subsequent.

A W Standen v G I Dines, A L Moorshead and A G Piggins (1955)
Nothing is known yet about the persons or facts of this case

Citation:

LT 13/733
Lands Tribunal (England): Decisions under Rating and Valuation Acts 1925-1984.
See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk">National Archives

Thompson v Heither (1956)
This is a case in which the plaintiff unsuccessfully alleged malicious prosecution by the police, Fred W. Piggins attorney at law and others. This was rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

Citation:

(1956) 235 F.2d 176

Re Piggin, Dicker v Lombank (1962)
The notes appear to indicate that Piggin was in possession of a van under a hire-purchase contract when he went bankrupt. In an English court, the bankruptcy trustee recovered some money from Lombank, which had repossessed the van.

Citation:

(1962) 112 L.J. 424

Walber v Wayne Circuit Judge Piggins (1966)
This is a case unsuccessfully brought against Detroit judge Edward S. Piggins over his refusal to hear an appeal against fine from a woman who kept too many dogs. She lost in both the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court.

Citation:

Court of Appeals (1966) 2 Mich.App. 145 [138 N.W.2d 772] Supreme Court: 381 Mich. 138, 160 N.W.2d 876 (Mich., Sep 25, 1968)

Tyranski v Piggins (1973)
Piggins' only role in this case was as the ancillary administrator of a deceased man's estate. That man's de facto wife successfully sued in Michigan to inherit a house.

Citation:

Appeals Court: 44 Mich.App. 570, 205 N.W.2d 595 (Mich.App., Feb 20, 1973). Michigan Supreme Court: 389 Mich 793.

Piggins & Rix Ltd v Montrose Port Authority (1995)
Summary: Piggins Rix is a Montrose firm that was founded by the late J.M. Piggins and is now part of the Rix group of companies. This was a Scottish case in which the court ruled that the port had no power to sell land to the company.

Citation:

1995 S.L.T. 418

Land & Marine Safe Felicia Ltd v Piggins-Rix Ltd (2001)
Summary: Nothing is known yet about the facts of this case. It was set down for hearing by Scottish Court of Session in February 2001. See above case for a description of Piggins-Rix.
See http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/rolls/R010208.htm

© Jean-Baptiste Piggin 2000-2009. This page may not be copied, published or placed online elsewhere without express permission from the author.