Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XIV, Issue 108, 2 March 1893, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Tins Day. (Before Mr. Brabant, R.M.) C. Fanthorpe v J. Monteith ; claim £3 12s sd. Mr Reade appeared for the defendant, who admitted the debt. Judgment was given for the amount claimed, with 12s costs. C. Fanthorpe v E. Dickson : claim £1 ' 7s. Mr Richmond for the plaintiff. Defendant had paid i' 2on account. Judgment was given for the sum of i's 7s, with 16s costs, and solicitor's fee 21s. Goobbehere and Richmond v E L. M. Neilson ; claim £27 2s 9.1. Mr Prior for the plaintiffs, and Mr Sandilnnds for the ' defendant. Adjourned till 6th April for the costs to bo taxed. E. H. Crabb v J. Monteith and D. Cur--1 tis ; claim £50 l'<h 6d. Mr Sandilnnds for plaintilT, and Mr Reade for defendants. £20 has already been paid, and judgment was given for plaintiff by arrangement for i the snni of £22 15s 6d, with £4 6s costa of court, and solicitors' fees £2 2s. , William Bellve vJ. Cotton ; claim 16s i 6d. Mr Reade for the plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed, with 6s costs. William Bellve v A. Clearstrem ; claim ■ £1. Mr Reade for the plaintiff. Judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, with 18s costs. A. K. Blundell, Inspector of Stock, charged A. Knyvett with » breach of tho . Branding }Act. Defendant was convicted and fined 20s, with 7s costs of Court. Edward Ranger, on the information of the police, was charged with allowing his 1 chimney to get on fire, and was fined ss, with 7s costs of Court. Joseph Smith, on ' a like charge, was fined a similar amount. E. Bellve v M. Oliver ; claim £20 16s 3d. His Worship delivered judgment in this case, which was heard some few weeks ago. The plaintiff sued tlie defendant for three years insurance prei mium on the Empire Hotel, and produced , the company's receipts to prove his pay- ■ ments. Estimates as to the value of the i premises for insurance purposes varied tvom ilOaO to £1400. Plaintiff could not t compel the defendant to insure to the full • value ; still the lessor could demand that the lessee should insure in the office which would issue the largest policy, and plaintiff as against the defendant was entitled to insist on a full insurance. Judgment would be for the plaintiff for three 3'ears premium on the sum of L 220, amounting to LlB 6s 6d, with LI 16s costs of Court, LI witnesses expenses, and counsels' fees L 2 2s. Frank Gay v. Thomas Dixon ; claim £2 10a. This case has been before the court twice, the defendant on each occasion putting in an appearance, and asserting that the plaintiff had not broken -in the horse in question according to the contract. Mr Sandilands for the plaintiff, who did not appear. The case was struck out. H. Wollerman v, A. Wells ; claim £8 103. Judgment for the plaintiff by arrangement for the amount claimed. Mr Reade, who appeared for the plaintiff, was allowed £1 Is counsel's fee. William Chirm y Samuel Daw ; claim £24. Mr Sandilands for the plantiff , and Mr Reade for the defendant. The evidence for the defence was first heard. Tho defendant was exarainod and crossexamined at great longtb, Tho matter was simply a question of account between the two parties. William Thorburn gave e%'idence for the defence. The plaintiff in his examination denied ever receiymg certain sums, which the defendant and his witness, Thorburn, stated had been paid to him. (.Left sitting.]