RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3968, 12 November 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Fkiday, November 12. {Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) Dunning v. Feraud.—Claim, Ll7 13s, for fruit supplied. His Worship in giving judgment in this case, said defendant telegraphed to plaintiff an order for a supply of fruit tor the Cromwell races, which plaintiff forwarded. The orauges sent, however, were rotten, and the plums unripe, both being unfit for use. Now, in the case of articles intended for human food! the vendor impliedly warrants them to be wholesome and fit, and in tins instance it hail been proved that the fruit was seen through the joints of the cases to be useless before leaving Dunedin. Where goods a>e not of proper quality an abatement of price may be allowed, and his Worship was of opinion that plaintiff was not entitled lo mure than the sum paid, into Court, viz., L 5 11s. Judgment wa? therefore given for that amount, without costs. R. Hislop v. Dodds.—Claim L4O, damages for injury caused to plaintiff’s horse by defendant. Mr Deuniston appeared for plaintiff ; Mr Aldridge for defendant,—Plaintiff saiil defendant borrowed his horse to do certain work with, lending witness a mare in its place. Jn about three weeks’ time defendant told him there had been a runaway accident and the horse was seriously hurt. Defendant said he would give witness a horse in exchange for the one injured, but never did so. Witness's horse was lamed bthe accident, and had considerably deteriorated in value. It was worth L4O previous t - the accident.—Cross examined : Witness bought the horse from defendant himself sixteen months befoie for L3O. —Mr Favquhar-ou, veterinary surgeon, deposed to having inspected the horse and found it lame. The lameness might last for four months, and possibly the horse would never recover. —K. Roberts said he had shortly before the accident offered plaintiff L 35 for the horse, which was refused.— Defendant said the horse was not seriously injured. He had tendered one to plaintiff in exchange, which was refused. —After another witness had been examined his Worship said defendant was clearly responsible for the injury caused to the horse, and ho would give judgment for plaintiff for Ll2, with costs. Judgment was given for plaintiffs by defau’t in the following cases : -Sargood, iSon, and Kwen v. A. C. Campbell, claim L 56 13s 9d, for dishonored acceptance and balance of account; Oliver and Ulph v. James Rattray (Macksmith), L3O 4s Id, for goods supplied ; Watson v. A. Corfield, L 4 16s Bd, balance due fur gioceries. S Tubman v. H. Farley.—Claim L2o9slod, balance due for work and labor done and material supplied in the Arcade. Mr Lewis appeared for plaintiff; Mr Aldridge for defendant. [Left sitting.]