MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14888, 30 January 1914, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before. Mr H. AY. Bishop, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. A female first offender for drunkenness was fined ss, in default 24 hours' imprisonment, and another convicted and discharged. DEFAULT CASES. Judgment by default was entered for plaintiffs, with costs, in tho following cases: —W. Strange and Co. (Mr Flesher) v. George Twecdie, £1 8s lid; same v. Ambrose Gilboy, £6 10s 9d; same v. John Bush, £4 4s 9d; Pitcher Bros. (Mr Vincent) v. Thomas Fraser Havnes, £3 Os 6d* same v. E. J. Barnes, £6 6s 6d; Dr. W. E. Stevens (Mr Cuningham) v. T. P. Smith, £3; samo v. 11. T. le Fleming, £5 lis; Christchurch City Council v. A. F. Gabb, £3 lis; Spreydon Borough Council v. M. J. Smith, 18s 2d; George F. Taigel (Mr Cuningham) v. Mr and Mrs F. H. Dodd, £10 14s 7d; Tothill, Ltd. (Mr X; Williams) v. W. H. Young, £23 5s 9d ; Fountain Bros. (Mr Cuningham) v. Morton Budd, £2; Dresden Piano Co. (Mr Cuningham) v. Mrs Meta Cairns, £15' 18s; Massey-Harris Co. (Mr Wright) v. C. S. Allen, £13 10s; G. Fairbairn (Mr Howe) v. J. Hayward, £3JBs!~Gd..- - • ■-.-...- •<•-. A COMPLICATED CLAIM. Mary Noonan (Mr Malley) claimed £20 Os Id from Thomas Maude (Mr Vincent), in connexion wifh the purchase of property at Horniby from J. R, Charlton (Mr Wright). Mr Charlton was added as defendant. -Tho claim was " made up of £10. alleged to have been overpaid, £9 9s interest on this £10, and the balance oh the current account. The defence was that the £10 alleged to have been overpaid was a proportion of rent, rates, and insurance duo on tho settlement of the property. Owing to tho lapse of the timo since the settlement, over seven years, and the complication of the accounts, the Magistrate gave judgment for 19s 4d," the amount paid into Court, as against tho defendant. T. Maude, and for the defendant J. R. Charlton, with costs. CLAIM AND COUNTER-CLAIM. Maurice Heslip (Mr Malley) claimed £3 18s 6d from John Heslip, the value of bootmaking apparatus alleged to have been left on the premises oP John Heslip, of which the plaintiff had been tenant. There was a counter-claim of £3 12s from Maurice Heslip for rent alleged to be due. After hearing evidence, the Magistrate said it was impossible to come to a satisfactory decision. He gave judgment for the defendant on both claims, without costs.