DOCTORS AT LAW.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19179, 9 December 1927, Page 8

DOCTORS AT LAW.

SALE OF PRACTICE.

MISREPRESENTATION ALLEGED.

[IBB PRESS Special Service.]

AUCKLAND, December 8,

The case in which Dr. William Arthur Aiexanuer ana his wife, Finney Alexander, of Takapuna (Mr D'iddes), claimed from Dr. Jtfnest James Miliar, ot Koyai Oak (Mr wichmond), xzwj damages for alleged rrauaulent misrepresentation, was continued before lV ir Justice iteed in the supreme (Jourt. l>r. Alexander last year Dr. Millar's practice and house at Takapuna for £4500, paying £IOOO for the practice, and £3oUO lor the house, anu ho claimed that the true value was £250 for the practice, and £2250 tor the house. .Evidence as to the results of an expert examination of the record books kept 'by Dr. Millar during three years prior to the sale of his practice was given by Henry Walter Shove, accountant. Witness said the total receipts shown for the three years amounted to £3644 lis 6d, giving a yearly average of approximately £l2lo. lhe figures posted into the beginning of Dr. Millar's 1926 year book showed an average of £1450, or £235 more. Recalled in the afternoon after a further examination of the books, witness said that for 1923, the _ year «•■ which he had spent most time, Dr. Millar's figures showed £1487, and the figures he had arrived at were £llsa 13s. So far as he had gone in the examination he could not establish a discrepancy of more than £4OO over the three years. , Mr Richmond, opening the case tor the defence, said the allegation was that Dr. Millar had shown average annual earnings amounting to £1450, whereas they were really £IOO2. Obvx ously, most of that had gone by the board, for an accountant had shown average earnings of £1215 from tn» books. Plaintiff had not investigated the books and had proved nothing. He knew that the figure of £IOOO on which he relied was totally wrong, and he had endeavoured to frighten the defendant into a big settlement. Counsel said it was monstrous to suggest that Dr. Millar would engineer a gross fraud for years, and then hand over to Dr. Alexander the books from which any fourth form boy could expose th* position in a few minutes. Dr. Milfar had submitted nothing but the truth. The bank books showed payments of between £7OO and £BOO a year into the bank, and in addition Dr. Millar paid all household and ourrent expenses, amounting to upwards of £6OO a year, out or cash not put through the bank. With regard to. the house, could it be proved that' there was any fraud in saying that the house cost "nearly £3500"? The position was that Dr. Millar, who was not anxious to sell, named his price and Dr. Alexander could take it or leave it. ~„ .. jT The defendant, Dr. Millar, said that earlv in 1926 he had no intention of selling his practice. He was approached to sell it, and made out certain figures of his receipts. In May he was telephoned to by Dr. Alexander, who later visited him at his home at Takapuna, but the sale of the practice was not discussed at that time. On a later visit witness showed Dr. Alexander his books in his surgery, but there was no general discussion on them. Then, after seeing the total figures, Dr. Alexander rather startled witness by saying "When can I start?" Witness said: "You are not buying a pound or butter! The practice is not for sale vet." Nothing had been .said previously as to the price, cither of the practice or of the house. At this stage the hearing was adjourned. '