SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1090, 31 March 1911, Page 8

SUPREME COURT.

> THE AI'ASTERTON SITTINGS. (From Our Special Correspondent.) Masterton, March 30. At the Supreme Court this morning, before his Honour the Chief Justice, Violet Rose Braggings petitioned for a divorce from James Arthur Braggins on tho ground of misconduct. The case was undefended, and 31r. A. R. Bunny appeared for 'petitioner. After hearing the evidence his Honour granted a decree nisi with costs according to scale. In the case in which George Edward Chapman sued for a divorce trom Alary Chapman his Honour granted a decree nisi. Costs against the co-respondent were not asked for. The case was undefended, and 3lr. A. R. Bunny appeared for petitioner. Appeal Cases. Mr. C. A. Pownall appealed under the Justices of the Peace Act against the decision of Jlr. L. G. Keid, S.M., in tho case in which — Buckeridge was fined under the Dairy Industry Act, 1908, for having supplied the I'arkvalc Dairy Company with milk alleged to be' adulterated. Air. C. A. Pownall appeared for appellant, aud 3lr. P. L. Holhngs for respondent. Air. Pownall argued that tho judgment of the magistrate was.wrong on the ground that there was an agency between defendant and the supplier, and that tho analysis provided by the statute had not been'made. After hearing,argument the appeal was dismissed, with i£4 •Is. costs to be paid to respondent An appeal was heard in the case of Henderson v. AVallis. Jlr. Pownall appeared for appellant, and Air. Alaunsell for respondent. It was stated in the hearing that Henderson had asked AA'.allis for an estimate for. certain repairs to a building at Carterton. AVhen this had been supplied the former telegraphed to him to commence at once. AVallis had replied that he could not commence till tho end of the month. No further communication was received from Henderson, and AVallis, believing that his' tender was accepted, was about to' commence work at the end of the month, when he received a telegram from Henderson telling him not to go on. The. contention of the appellant was that I here was no building contract, as AVallis did not commence work at once as requested. His Honour dismissed the appeal with costs, ,£5 55., in AVallis's favour. An appeal was made against the, judgment of Air. Rcid. 5.31., for plaintiff in (he case nf Rat.hbino v. Harris. Atr. Pownall, for appellant, argued • that an acceptance of a promissory note from the debtor (Whitehead) discharged defendant (Harris), who had guaranteed plaintiff's account- for which the magistrate had given his decision. Air. Rollings appeared for respondent. His Honour reserved bis decision. Change of Venue. An application by Atr. T. Jordan for a change of venue in the appeal case of Leo v. York was granted by his Honour this morning. The appeal is against a decision by Air. C. C.'Graham, S.AL.'on the ground that it was against the weight of evidence, and it will be luard in AVellinglon after Easter. James Lee, it will bo remembered, sued Thomas Flint York for .£75 damages for alleged breach of contract in regard to the purchaso' of some sheep, and" the decision'• went against him.