AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 2, Issue 111, 10 August 1877, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, August 7, 1877. (Before Justin Aylmer; Esq., R.M.," and GH. J .P.) Civil :^RsBULMER V. LeWILIANT. This was a case adjourned from the 31st ultimo, for further evidence. Mr. Nalder, solicitor for plaintiff, stated that the defendant was now willing to settle the accountJudgment given by consent for amount claimed, with costs. b. shadbolt v. j. olphert. This was a claim for £100 damages, for allowing plaintiff's son, aged 17, to play at cards and gamble in the Somerset Hotel of which the defendant was alleged to have been in charge. After hearing the evidence the Bench gave judgment for the defendant with costs. piper v. hillyer. In this case the plaintiff! as Chairman of the Duvauchelle's Bay School Committee charged the defendant with refusing to leave a cottage, the property of the Education Board, due notice to quit having been given. There was no appearance of defendant. Order made to leave the premises. This will carry costs. chadwick v. w. green. This was a judgment summons, for £5 3s 6d. Mr. Green appeared for the defendant, and offered £2, which the pliantiff agreed to accept as payment in full costs to be divided. LEPROU V. JOHNSTON. Claim £8, for work done.— This case, which had been set for hearing on Friday 10th inst, was heard on this day by mutual consent. Mr. Inwood appeared for the plaintiff. The evidence went to show; that the plaintiff had received an order from W. Higgins to make two new tires for the wheels of defendant's dray. He was to look to defendant for payment. The work was unusual, being very thick iron 5 J inches by f inch. There was no bargin made about charge. W. Higgins deposed that he was repairing the wheels for Johnson, who told him O'Reilly was to put the tires on, but O'Reilly refused to undertake"the job. He had then told Johnson, and it was agreed that Leprou should have- the workl Johnson found the iron. was very good. Considered the charge a fair one. The defendant's evidence merely went to prove that the charge was excessive. He did not object to pay Leprou, bat objected to the amount. He incidentally remarked that the last job Leprou did for him was to shoe his horse, when he put the hind shoes on the fore feet. (Sensation.) The Bench considered an agreement should have been made beforehand, and granted judgment, for amount claimed with costs. . . The Court then adjourned.