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

Feilding R.M. Court

This Day.

(Before Mr S. Goodbehere and Mr Gf>

Kirton. J.P.s.) DOa OABES.

Borough Dog Tax Collector v. H. Bilderbeck. Four cases. No appearance of either party. Cases struck out.

DEBT OASES.

John Hubner v. H. Bilderbeck.— Claim £7 6s 4d. Otto Hubner v. H, Bilderbeck. —Claim £7 ls 9d. Emil Hubuer v. H. Bilderbeck.— Claim £7 5s 3d. Mr Staite for plaintiffs, and Mr Sandilands for defendant. It was arranged that th* decision on the first oase should be accepted for the other two.

John Hubner deposed to the time ho had worked at the erection of a privatehouse for defendant, for which he claimed £9 6s 4d, less £2 for fruit trees he had purchased from defendant ; he had given defendant an account of his time, and asked for payment.

Mr Sandilands cross-examined to elicit from witness that he had worked for Bilderbeck with the understanding that ho should be paid m labor by Bilderbeck when plaintiff was putting up a house for himself.

Re-examined by Mr Staite; Defendant had never disputed the time, and had promised to pay plaintiff out of Buchannan's contract

Otto Hubner deposed he had worked oa the several jobs with hie brothers and Bilderbeck ; worked for money, not friendship. Emil Hubner gave evidence to a similar effect.

For the defence, Mr Sandilands called H. H. Bilderbeck, who deposed : The Hubners were friends of his, and he had worked with Hubners on a job at Price's; wnen that was finished, as work was •care*, he arranged with the plaintiffs to assist lum in putting up bis private house: he did not keep tbeir time because he did not understand they were working for wages ; had previously helped plaintiffs with work, for which he had not made auy claim ; if the Hubners were doing any building, he was prepared to do work for them to complete the ar* rangement.

After counsel oo both aides had addressed the Court, a verdict was given for plaintiff in each case with counsel's fee 21s, costs of court SOs, to be paid in monthly instalments of 20s in each case. The Court then adjourned.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/FS18881023.2.15

Bibliographic details

Feilding Star, Volume X, Issue 38, 23 October 1888, Page 2

Word Count
358

Feilding R.M. Court Feilding Star, Volume X, Issue 38, 23 October 1888, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court Feilding Star, Volume X, Issue 38, 23 October 1888, Page 2

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