Resident Magistrate's Court.

Clutha Leader, Volume II, Issue 81, 27 January 1876, Page 5

Resident Magistrate's Court.

Wednesday, 28 bh January, 1576. (Before J. P. Maitland, Esq., R,M.) VALE V WILLIAMS, & CO. Claim loir £7, for repairing coach. Before any evidence was given the R. M. stated he would rather not hear the case, as his brother wa3 one of the Defendants. Both parties appreciated His Woi'ship's feeling in the matter, but were anxious and willing that he should hear the case. The plaintiff stated tbart he had been employed by W. G. Maitland to repair a coach, that he had done tbe work but could not get his money. Mr Taylor who appeared for defendant, called Mr Dunne who stated that plaintiff had agreed with him to repair the coach for 50s. W. G. Maitland stated he requested plaintiff to put coach in same condition as it was in formerly, and that when account was rendered he informed plaintiff Mr Dunne would not pay the amount. Plaintiff replied he had nothing to do with Mr Dunne, as he made agreement with witness. Magistrate stated defendants were liable, but that amount claimed appeared excessive. Judgment was given for £5 and costs. DOULL V WHITE, Claim of £30, value of a horse. Mr Reid for plaintiff, Taylor for defendant. The case was — plaintiff had given defendant a horse to break in, and alleged that tbe agreement was to have it returned in two months. The horse w"ss accidentally killed after it had been in defendants possesaion for 3g months. Defendant alleged he was to keep the horse until it was thoroughly broke in— no time mentioned. His Worship gave defendant the benefit of a doubt upon the point, and gave him a judgment but without costs,