MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3056, 18 April 1917, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

' CIVIL CASES. , ' //Mr. \V."G, Riddell/.S'.M., presided ■ in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Judgment was entered for plaintiff by. default "in the following undefended civil cases * ' • '■';: Win. Niool %' J. F. : Jonos, £1 14s. 6d., costs 13s.| Oscar Hewett and Co. v. Margaret Sullivan, £2, costs £1 75.; Magnus Sanderson and Co., Ltd., v. William J. Barlow, £48 13s. Id., costs £6 ;135. : ; Garnet Sims v.; H.' Thomas, lis.;, costs 65.: Excelsior Laundry, Co. •v. Agnes-G. : Williamsdn._.£2s os. 4di, -- 'costs £2 145.;; Charlesi'llussell v.- W. 11.. B.,Atkin, £18,85..;2d., costs : £1-10s. Andrew M-. Legge £7 17sV.10d;, costs £1 3a. 6d.; Wellington - : Dairy C 0.,; Ltd., v.' A: G. Williamson, £3,105.,, costs 10s.; Charles Russell v. J..W, : M'Kay, £2 6s. 7d\, costa 10s.; James Anderson Dunn v: James Douglas'Seymout. £102,'.coste £6 lis.; Hope Gibbons,',^Sons, and-j. B. Clarkson, Ltd.V--.v-. Bastin-and -Avery, -155., costs only;. Caselberg and Co., Ltd.,- v. H. , ,M.;Abbott, £21 95., costs £1 35.; Well- ; irigton. Drivers' Union v. Thomas John Hedges; £1 2s. 9d., costs 65.; same v.' • .Charles. Rogers, £1 Is;, costs 65.; H.- ; E. Geddis and-Co., v:. Waiter .E, Wil- : liams, £13 ,-165.-;Bd.v costs £1 10s. 6d.; City. Council v. Carl Hausman, £13 .lls..'3d'.,:'costs.,lss.; Town and Country Supply Stores v. I. P., Willison, £1 6s. Bd., costs 55.;.' : JUDGMENT SUAIMONS. , ; M. O'Kane was .ordered .to pay Thomson, Lewis, and Co., the sum of £0 by May 1, in default nvo days' imprisonment, < It. ltamsay to pay tho Pyrene Manufacturing Co. £8 ss. Cd. by May 1, in default seven days': imprisonment. .

Decision was reserved in tho case of D.Milligau v. Frederick Charles Faher, a'claim for £18 16s. for two suits.' Mr. H. E. Anderson appeared for plaintiff and Mr. G: G. G. Watson for defendant.;-- ; . ■'- V ..-...'.. ",''..

A case which occupied a considerable time of the Court was that in whicli the Zealandia, Co-operative Wood Co., Ltd., represented by Mr. H. E. Evans, proceeded against the Marble Bar, Ltd,, represented'by-Mr. A. W. Blair, for £79 2s. 6d., £18 2s. Cd. Being, bahuico alleged to be due for chairs supplied to plaintiffs, and £61 alleged to be due for the supply of tile-topped tables. The defence was that the tables had not been made according to sample; also that the 'workmanship was defective; The evidence for' the defence had not concluded when tho'Court rose.