TAURANGA R.M. COURT.

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume IV, Issue 316, 18 September 1875, Page 3

TAURANGA R.M. COURT.

. Wednesday, Septembeh 15, 1875. (Before Major Roberts, E.M.) EDGCDMBE V, HAST lE. Claim £0 15s. Case struck out. No appearance of plaintiff or defendant. LANOBIUDGE V. PHILIPS. Claim £2 12s. The defendant produced a receipt for tho amount paid previous to service of summons. Tho plaintiff was accordingly ordered to pay costs. A3IM.ITAGE V- FOLEY. Claim £ll IBs, for medical attendance on Mrs Foley, at tho Jvatikath There was no appearance of the 'defendant. Judgment for plaintiff for full amount with costs. HAMIT Eli A PARI V. PER A TITOKL Claim £1 10s, for illegal claim for damages charged for plaintiff’s cattle trespassing on defendant’s property'. Judgment for plaintiff for full amount with costs, GREGORY V- ISAAC WILSON, Claim £9 12s lid. Mr Dufaur appeared for defendant. This was a disputed claim for timber delivered to defendant at Ohinomutu. Plaintiff admitted that lie had hilled defendant for a certain sum on tho 15th May, and that all tho timber in question had boon delivered by that elate.

Defendant proved that on account of this bill ho had paid certain sums. The balance was■ paid into Court. The evidence throughout was of no special interest. The Court reserved judgment until 2 o’clock in the afternoon. CHUIBTIR WItSOV V. ISAAC WILSON. Claim .£36 11s 9(1, for timber cut for telegraph station at Ohiuomutn. Mr Diifanr appeared for defendant. The plaintiff stated his case, and said that ho had come from Tanpo to cut this timber for Mr Wilson; but, on being cross-examined by Mr Dufaur, counsel for defendant, Wilson admitted that a man named Pope was working mates with him share and share alike in cutting the

timber. Mr Diifaur accordingly objected to the plaintiff sueing in this case, as the law ruled that when there was more than ono partner in a concern all partners must join tog-ether in bringing an action. The Court ruled that the objection raised by defendant’s counsel was fatal, but would allow the plaintiff to accept a nonsuit; if he did not, the Court would hayo to give judgment for defendant. Nonsuit accepted. OHHISTIE WIIBON V. I'AAO WfLON. Claim £23. Mr Diifaur appeared for defendant. This, was a claim arising out of the former suit, and was made by plaintiff for alleged loss of time while waiting for defendant at Ohinenmtu previous to commencing work; for time lost after the work was finished pending settlement of accounts; and for expenses in coming to Tuuranga to take out summons. The plaintiff stated Iris case, and called ono witness on his behalf. The Court did not consider it necessary to call on the evidence for the defence, the plaintiff’s case not having been sufficiently proved. Judgment was accordingly given for defendant. The Court having re-opened after an hours’ adjournment, Judgment was given in the case Gregory v. Wilson for the plaintiff' for 7s. 11 d. and Bs. costs; plaintiff’ to pay ss. Court fees and solicitor’s fees. HANNON V. ISAAC WILSON. Claim for damages for breach of contract, £IOO. Mr Dufanr appeared for the defendant.

Mr Hannon called upon Mr Wilson to bo the first witness in the case, and handed in an agreement, to which the defendant admitted having agreed. Mr Dufaur, counsel for the defendant, pointed out to the Court that the agreement produced by Mr Hannon was not a legal document; it referred

to native lands for wliieli the memorial of ownership had not been R.-,m d us required under the Dm:- oi tin 1 Aft. The (hurt d< cid< d that the h cm mont could not U admitted in evidmwe. A second agre» mont was produced by Mr iiaimon to which Mr Dufaur also objected on the same grounds as applied to the first document. The Court deckled in favour of the objection raised by defendant’s counsel, that the bearing tlio second agreement had on the first rendered it also inadmissablo in evidence.

The Court accordingly gave judgment for defendant with costs.