Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESERVED JUDGMENTS

MAGISTRATE'S DECISION t'PHELD. * In'the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon His Honour the Chief Justice _ (Sir liobert Stout) delivered reserved judgments. , , ~ . The first was on an appeal brought lis J. A. Seattle, of Wellington, enrage owner, against a j udirnjcnt delivered by Air. W. G. Hiddell. SX, in the Magistrate a Court. The respondent was P. T. Moore, of Johnsonvllle. The facto were that the appellant Seattle, on or about August if, IMS, at 11.50 p.m., was proceeding in his motor-car alonn the Hutt Road, and the respondent's motor-bus. driven by his servant, was in front. Tho tail light of the bus was not showing, and the/bus was pulled up on the road to take un a lady passenger. Tho driver of the motor-car, in seeking to avoid the lady, who had stepped off tho footpath, swerved nnd rail into the bus and sustained damages. The Magistrate held that, thero was negligence on the part of the driver of tho bus. and also found that the driver of the car was negligent in that had he kent a sro.oer lookout lie would hav<) seen the bus. and would have been able to avoid it. The Magistrate hold that the plaintiff hnd a late* opportunity of avoiding-the accident than tho defendant, and cave judgment for defendant. Tho appeal was against this judgment. . • . His. Honour, after reviewing tnp cask. dismissed the appeal with costs. At the hearing on Thursday, Mr; T. Neavo appeared for the appellant, «uid Mr. 0. 1. Skerrett, K.C., with liira Mr. 0. V>. Lanner, for tho respondent.

INTERPRETATION OP A WILL. His Hoiiour also pave judgment in an origlnatinir summons for an order interpreting the will of Thomas Grace, of. Eastbourne. The question submitted to the Court was whether in the trusts declared in the will of Thomas Grace and in respect. of the residuary estate. Lilian May Nicel therein named and since deceased, in addition t-o the one half share expressly given to her by the will, was entitled to a share in the remainder of the residuary estate as being one of the chfWren of Pharlos W'elby Jackson named.in tho will. His Honour held -that she was entitled to share in the residuary estate, ovor and above the half share expressly given to hor. ; At the hearing on Thursday, Mr. P. Levi appeared for tho plaintiffs, Thomas M. Vfilford and Gordon F. IV7 Jackson: Mr, It. Kennedy for W. A. Jackson, R. L. Jackson, John K. Jackson, and Louisa Gillies; and Mr. H. F. O'Leary for the infant children of Lilian Jfay Nicol {(Jeceased).

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19200313.2.87

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 144, 13 March 1920, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
428

RESERVED JUDGMENTS Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 144, 13 March 1920, Page 8

RESERVED JUDGMENTS Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 144, 13 March 1920, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert