MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2234, 21 August 1914, Page 8

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

' SUMMARILY EJECTED /' '■'.'.' —__' ' -"' •' sequel to a manners street Incident ■;. v CLAIM, FOR DAMAGES •The sequel to a certain ejectment from an office in' Manners Street on May 8 last occurred in the Magistrate's. Court, before Mr: W. G. Riddell, S.M., yesterday morning, when Fredk.' Joseph iFanuihg, salesman, proceeded against Fredk: Sanders, contractor,'for the recovery of the sum of £100, damages for an'assault alleged to have been committed upon him by defendant and cor-• tain of his servants. • During the heari ing of the case Mr. H..F. O'Leary anpearcd for plaintiff, and Mr..M. Myers, for.defendant. : • '.' . . : ■ '. ■ ' In. a i>reliminary review of the facts of the case, Mr. O'Leary said that oh tho morning of May 8 Mr. .Fanning was peacefully and lawfully in his premises in Manners Street when he was taken hold of By. Mr. Sanders and three or ifour workmen, and thrown'out of tho shop into Manners- Street., Counsel asked for substantia) damages. His client had been subjected to great indigo nity in the presenco of a number of passers-by, and-such an action as tlrs might very well prejudico him, in.the course of,his business. . ' ' Plaintiff's Story. In the course of his evidence the plain-, tiff, F. «L Fanning, statod that on tho morning- of May 8 defendant had ordered him pff the premises. Witness refused, and defendant sent for a policeman. A Sergeant; Tell arrived, but refused to have anything to do in putting him, off, . Thereupon the defendant, as.sisted by some workmen, forcibly put him out of-the shop on, to the roadway. To Mr. Myers: Witness was aware of tho-fact that his firm bad threatened to prevent Sanders going on with their work: on the premises. He had remonstrated with Sanders for. going on with. the work. Witness admitted that after being,asked civilly to leave be refused, : and it,was. then that Sanders asked him to "get out or be put out." Further evidence was called on behalf of plaintiff. . . ;'•''.' '. \ "Storm in aTeacup." Mr. Myers submitted -that plaintiff must be nonsuited, for the simple rea'non that, plaintiff had no ripht to be on tho premises. Mr. Myers characterised the aaffir as "a stoim in a teacup," and a matter wliich should never have been brought before the Court. ■', Mr. O'Leary replied that' his client had a. right'to be there. Apart fronv this, however; the fact remained that Hnassault had been committed. : , •The' Magistrate: I am' not,prepared, to grant a. nonsuit. ':•■''. ' -' .■■,'■ ' Mr. Myers: jThen I'will call evidence to show that plaintiff hnd absolutely noripht to be on-tlie promises. . In-his-evidence, defendant said that no unnecessary force had been iised in pushing plaintiff off the premises. They simply had to push him off, so that they might get on with their work. Mr. O'Leary: Do you consider it a trivial.matter, to,.be bundled out of a sliofi "by three or four people in the presenco.of iijnumber of ppssers-byp—-Witness "f.if tor"hesitation): Yes. Mr. O'Learv,: Nothing but "a storm in a Yes. ~.,.,,, Mr. O'Learfc at this stage stated'his? intention. of callins rebuttal evidence to.showJthat plaintiff;was justified iji being on the promises. On his appiicatipii.it was decided to adjourn the case until Saturday week, so that ho raMit look into the 'lojral question as to wbother plaintiff .had a right to be on the premises.or;noi7. " ■ CARTAGE'OF CHAFF. / • A'civil .action- in which tho New Zeajland Farmers'. Co-operiitive 'Distributj ing Company;-Ltd., proceeded against J. J. Curtis-arid Co., LM., for the recovery of the sum 'of £2 was heard before Mr. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M. ( Tlie claim was made as damages in respect tq an alleged breach of cartage conditions wijtli; reference to the delivery of! n quantity of chaff. During the hearing, Mri Mazengarb appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr..H. F. Von Haast for defp.ndants. Judgmont was given for plaintiffs for £1,. with, costs. : : '■•■ : DEFADL'nNG DEBTORS. ■■Judgment for plaintiff by default with costs'was given by Mr. W. G. Riddell,' S.M., in. the following undefended civil' fictions:—Macky, Logan, Caldwell, Ltd., v.; J. Peter, £3 Is:; costs 18s.; Bins, Harris,, arid Co., v. J. E. Griffiths, £2 Bs. 3d.,- costs' 10s.: Rosenberg and Co. v. James M'Quilka'u, £3, costs £1 55,; George Remington and Co. v. J. An-< drews, £3 9s. 3d., costs 10s.; W. H. Boyd v. Richard Page, £5 os. 10d., costs £1 4s. fid.; J. Godßer and Co , Ltd., v. Hilda May Butler, £2 155., costs '10s.; George Doughty and Co. v. Claude W. Lodge, -3s. 2d., costs 25.; Accountancy and Educational Publications, Ltd., v, John Phillips, £1 3s. Id., costs Bs.; Wellington Dairy, Ltd., v. Charles Herhert Snow,' £2 17s. 6d., costs 10s.; Caselberg, Stein, and Co., Ltd., v. It: Pook, £2 Bs. 9d., costs 55.; Books and Papers, Ltd., v. A. O. Walker, £2 17s. Bd. costs 125.; samo v. Annio Ryan, £1 2s. 6d., cos|is 75.; same v. J. Mairs, £2 6s. lid., costs l'2s.j.'Hon. J. A. Millar v. W. o.'Millar, £30, costs £2 145.; Stephen Matterson V. A..'H.'.Pipe'r, £9 2s. Gd., costs £l'3s. 6d.; Howard Spackman v. 0. O'vConnor, £8-75., costs £1 3s. 6d.; Alec Klipple v. Arthur Bull, £4 6s. 7d., cost-B 10s.: Public' Trustee v. James M'Connell,,' £4; ss.- Bd., costs 165.; Albert E<l- - lCilchingha,m v. Robert Neal, costs only, 35.; Solcne Moore v. Charles Koronio, 18s., costs 10s.; Johnston and Co. v. Michael J; 'Brosnan, £18 18s., costs £1 10s'."6(1.';' George Richard Rogers v. Arthur Maloney, £2 17s. 6d., costs 55.; Thompson, , Lo'wis, and Co. v. Harry Ogden, £3 65.3d., costs 11s. ' JUDGMENT SUMMONS CASE. ' O. Russell was ordered to pay Edward Morris, jun., the sum of £C 3 Bs., before September' 8, in default 21 days in the Auckland Gaol. POLICE CASES. The police business of tho court was presided over by Mr. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M. • Two youths, Glon Colo and Ernest Edward Harper, vere remanded to.appear at Christchurch to-day on a charge of committing the theft at Christchurch of a bicycle valued at £3, tho property of some person-unknown.. Peter Lane, charged with failure to maintain (the arrears amounted t0.£20 10s.), was ordered to be imprisoned for ono month, the warrant to be suspended on tho payment of 2s. 6d. a wpek off the arrears. i For drunkenness. Mary Smith was lined £2, Annio Murdoch and Louis Durholf wore each fined £1, and May M'Maims and Louisa Tiprney each 10s. Margaret Irving, charged, was sentenced to seven days' imprisonment.