RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.
Wednesday, September 30. (Before T, A, Hansford, Esq., R.M.) Trespass.—Mary Thomson was with trespassing on the premises of Alf. Palmer on September 29.—Pr<3$tdutor said that accused went into his shop last evening, while under the influence of liquor, and asked him for a towel, Ha told her to go home, whereupon she assaulted him, and he had to call in the police. Accused said that prosecutor had on a former occasion taken her off the streets to his home, and that she simply went to demand payment of some monay he owed her. —His Worship said that had it not been for the defence set up, he should have considered the facts not proved, and dismissed the case; but the fact of accused having set up that defence convinced him that she was illegally on the premises, bhe was fined 10s, or in default tweuty-four hours’ imprisonment. Drunkenness.—John Reilly was fined ss, with the pption of twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. CIVIL CASES. Fowler v. Grant.—This was a fraud summons, but the amount did not transpire.—— Defendant was ordered to pay one-half the amount within fourteen days, and the balance fourteen days afterwards. Edward Cooke v. James Carmichael.— Claim for professional services* rendered The amount did not transpire.—Judgment was given by default for the amount claimed, with costs, Dooke v. Mary Callaghan.—Mr Bathgate, who for plaintiff, explained that this was an action for ejectment, defendant, who rented one of plaintiff’s houses, refusing to give up possession of it. Shp had not paid any rent since the 4th of July, and now owed L 3 6a. Defendant did not appear, and hia Worship gave judgment for the amount claimed, and ordered defendant to give up possession within a week. Neil v. Johnston.—Claim L 3 10s, for moneys lent, and board and lodging.—Judgment was given for the amount, together with costs.—Mr Saunders appeared for the plaintiff. Edward Lyons v. Alexander Mackenzie. Claim L 9 14s, for balance of amount due. Judgment was given by default for the amount claimed, together with costs. R. Wilson v. J. Shepherd. —Claim L 8 9s 101, for goods supplied.—Judgment was given for the amount claimed, with costs.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18740930.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Evening Star, Issue 3621, 30 September 1874, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
362RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3621, 30 September 1874, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.