MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1107, 21 April 1911, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

* (Before Dr. A. jrArHiur, S.M.) CIVIL BUSINESS. UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment by default was given for - plaintiffs in tlic following undefended i oases:—lCirfccaldic and Mains, Ltd., v. s John AVm. Adams, «£2 10s., costs lis.; S. s S. Williams Ltd., v. I'. Archer, JCB ss. . 3d., costs l'2s.; A. Norman Jones v. Eds ward M. M'Ginnity, £i 10s., costs JS'i 4s. I Gel. ;I(. A. Cnmcron v. Alfred Wilton, =£5 9s. 6d., costs .£1 ss. 6d.; Violet Stark,v. . V. Turner, £3 Bs., costs 10s.; Wright, . Ranish and Co. v. Henry 11. Hetet, «£8 lis. 2d., costs ,fct 3s. Gd.; Jos. Nathan and 3 Co., Ltd., v. Josephine TerriH, .£3B 15s. 3d., costs £1 Us.; John Herbert Hutson , v. Julius Lamberg, 125., costs Bs.; A. W. and ]i\ C. Br'ailsford v. A. E. Alston, £5 » 55., costs Ss.; Wellington. Gas Co., Ltd., a v. J. Doig, i'O 19s. 6d., costs ,£1 6s. 6d.; c Sharlancl and Co., Ltd., v. Johnson Bros., j .£6 16s. flcl., costs £1 3s. 6d.; Y\\ Ivinsey v. Ilaro Pa rata, 43 25., costs 175.; Hum- ~ phries Bros. v. l'\ Harding, X 2 Is. 4d„ I costs 10s.; H. Pauli and Co. v. A. A. H. ° Walker, ,£M Hs. 3d., costs .£2 145.; W«l----j. lington Publishing Co., Ltd., v. Geo. Alex. , ll'llvride, ,21 os., costs ss. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. > Prank Aiorwli wis ordered to pay 43 Bs. sd. to Herbert Price on lor beforo 5 May 4, in default three days' imprison- : ment. i In the case of E. J. Turner v. J. Cook, ' a claim for -£13 6s. 6d., defendant was ! ordered to pay the amount on or before : May 11, in default fourteen days' iinpris- ' onment, the warrant to bo suspended so ! long as ss. per week is paid. No order was made in the following cases:—J. Patterson and Co. v. George ! Clark, a claim for- £8 os. 3d.; John Kirk--1 naldie v. Tlios. Macaulev, a claim for 45 s ss. ) i ■ PLAINTIFF'NONSUITED. . Reserved judgment was delivered in the ; nonsuit point raised by deteudant's coun- ■ sel in, the case in which Joseph Ormrod, : storekeeper, Berlianipore, sued Peter Van ■ der Velaen, artist, Uuppa tStrcet, tor the > delivery of a portrait of plaintiff's wife, which, it was alleged, defendant had con--1 traded to execute for a sum of 410 ss. 3u It was further alleged that the portrait had been completed by defendant, Van der Velden, and paid lor by plaintiff, but had not been delivered by the artist. In the alternative the plaintiff Ormrod claimed 450 15s. 3d., being the aforesaid sum of 410 15s. 3d., plue 440 for damages for non-delivery. A further fiurn of 4'J Ids, 4d. was claimed for goods sold and delivered. Mr. W. L. Rothenberg appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. G. 11. Fell for defenDuring the course of his judgment the magistrate said::— "At the conclusion of plaintiff's cas« counsel for the defendant asked for a nonsuit under the Sale of "Goods Act, 1908, on the ground that the sale of the picture was a contract for the salo of goods of the value o'f upwards of 410, and that no note or written memorandum of the contract was made and signed by the party to be charged or his agent in that behalf. It was contended for the plaintiff that tho credit given in his books for the amount of 410 15s. 3d. was a memorandum in writing. Counsel for the defence also contended that there were no specific goods contracted for under the meaning of the statute. It is clear that the. picture which was to be painted does not come under the definition of 'specific goods.'. I havo carefully considered all the citations of counsel" for both parties. There is no memorandum in writing, and nothing has been dono by the defendant in addition to' the making of the oral contract in affirmation of the bargain thereby made. I do not consider that ihe mere giving of a credit in plaintiff's book is sufficient to bind defendant. Plaintiff must be nonsuited as to the delivery of the picture and .damages, The defendant, however, admits 1 the' amduiit''-'due -"for : goods, viz., 420 9s. 7d., f-.-r -which plaintiff has. judgment. As each party has been partially successful there will bo no costs." Security for leave to appeal was fixed at 41010s. . : PROMISSORY NOTE. After several adjournments finality was reached yesterday in the case in which the Empire loan and Discount Company, Limited, registered money-lenders, Lambton Quay, claimed 47 12s. from Herbert William Southce and Alfred Southee. labourers, Upper Hutt, and Annie Southce, wifo of Alfred Southee. The amount was tho balance alleged to be due on a promissory note dated December 17, 1904, made by the defendant, Herbert William Southee, and endorsed by the defendants, Alfred Southee and Annie Southee. Mr.. C. R. Dix appeared for plaintiffs, and' Mr. P. W. Jackson for defendants. Plaintiffs at the outset reduced the claim to 42 12s. to rectify an error in their figures, and finally agreed to accept 42. Judgment was accordingly entered for plaintiffs for 42, with costs 42 4s. HUSBAND AND WIFE. Margaret Aekins, married woman, of Wellington, sued Robert James Aekins, civil servant, to recover tho sum of 422, being tho balance of weekly instalments of 42 10s., alleged to be duo for maintenance for a period from January 7, 1911, to April 1, 1911. Mr. Dalziell appeared for. plaintiff, and Mr. A. Gray for defendant. The' claim hinged on the question as to whether defendant should pay the full weekly amount due under the deed of separation, or whether he should pay the sum of 42 a week, which, it was alleged, had been accepted by plaintiff in tho past. After hearing evidence and legal argument. his Worship intimated. that ho would give his decision on Tuesday week. A DEAL IN CEMENT. (Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) William Ilenry Nimmo,. builder and contractor, Wellington, claimed 42 9s. ■ 6d. from James C. Lane, Newtown, amount alleged to be due for cement sold and delivered. Mr. A. H. Casey appeared . for the plaintiff, and Mr. Holmden-for defendant. After 1 hearing evidence, the magistrate gave judgment for plaintiff for 41 10s., with costs Ss. POLICE CASES. Michael O'Brien, alias Doyle, Frank Voss, and Thomas Lane were charged «:ith stealing 3s. in money and two railway luggage tickets from Leonard David M'CracKen. Tho offence was alleged to havo taken place on Tuesday last. On the application of Chief-Detective Broberg, tnc three accu&ed were remanded until April 20. Bail was allowed in the sum of 450, and two sureties of 425 each. Annie Petersen, appearing on remand, was charged with, unlawfully using an instrument with intent to procure abortion. Mr'. A. L. Herdman appeared for accused, who was further remanded unul April 26. Bail was allowed ill the samo amounts as before. Edward Reynolds, appearing on remand, was charged(lJ with unlawfully supplying an instrument, knowing it to havo been intended for an unlawful pur- j pose; (2) with' unlawfully using an in- I strument with intent to procure abor- E lion. On the application of Chief Detec- | tive Brobcrg, accused was further re- j manded until April 26. Mr. P. W. Jack- j son appeared for accused, who was grant- j ed bail in the same amounts as pro- f vionsly. ? John William Lucas admitted a charge of drunkenness, and a further charge of procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order. For the lir.st r offence lie was convicted and discharged, and, for the second, he was fined 405.. in default Id days'"imprisonment. William Newman, who was charged with two similar offences, was penalised in the same ' manner as Luca.?. Kate Sweeney, charged with drunkenness, was declared a habitual inebriate, and was sentenced to 21 days' imprisonment. A first-offending inebriate was fined with tho alternative of 24 hours' imprisonment. Another first offender was convicted and discharged.