RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2169, 20 April 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

This Day. (Before A.C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. Pish and Son v. Griffin.— Ll7 16s lOd. Mr Bathgate for the plaintiffs. Judgment by default for the plaintiffs. Jno. Thunderbolt v. Francis Samuels.— L 7. A claim for board, waiting on, doctor's fee, and medicines during the confinement of the defendant's wife. The defendant objected that the agreement was for 15s a week, Judgment for the amount claimed. M'Landress, Hepburn, and Co. v. Sampson.—Ls 12s. Struck out; no appearance of plaintiffs. Tomlinson v. Bird.—A claim for paddocking three horses, at 3s 6d each per week, from 13th March to 14th April. Judgment for the plaintiff, L2 lis, with costs. Millar v. Stentiford.—A claim for L2 15s 6(1, balance of account for professional services. The defendant objected to the charge as excessive. A lotter was put in, under date November, 1868, signed with the defendant's name, promising to call and pay something on account, which he did shortly afterwards. The defendant denied all knowledge of the letter. His Worship stated he had no doubt the letter was written by authority of the defendant. Judgment for plaintiff, L2 15s 6d and costs. Millar v. Crawford.—Ll2 12s, for professional services. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff; Mr Harris for the defendant. The case, as stated by the plaintiff, was, that Mr Crawford having a lawsuit with Mr Logan respecting the condition of premises on which the defendant was about to enter, the plaintiff was employed to give such plans and evidence as were necessary to sustain the action. Four guineas, allowed by the taxing master for expenses as a witness, had been received, and deducted from the account, and the action was brought for the balance. For the defence, it was stated the plaintiff was never employed, that plans and specifications were never rendered, and that the plaintiff had only a claim for the expenses paid as witness. His Worship was of opinion that the plaintiff was employed by the defendant, and that the plans and specifications were supplied in accordance with his instructions. The extra claim for expenses as a witness above that allowed by the Court could not be allowed. Verdict for the plaintiff, L 7 7s. Angus Campbell v. D. Campbell,—A claim for LlO for money lent. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff. The case was undefended. Judgment by defau't for plaintiff. Gray v. Fyfe.—A claim for L 7 for balance of account. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff. Judgment by default for plaintiff for the amount. Several cases were struck out for nonappearance. (Loft sitting.)