Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XV, Issue 135, 7 December 1893, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

THIS DAY. (Before Mr Brabant, R.M.) It. Burne v. J. McMillan ; claioi £4 6s. Mr Sandilands appeared for the plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs 4s. W. G. Haybittle v. A. Hannett; claim £2 17s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed, and costs 7s and solicitor's fee 21s. Wm, Light v. Benjamin Levoi j claim £11 19s 6d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs £1 and solicitor's fee 21s. L. H. Goldfinch v, B, Levoi ; claim £3 15s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs 6s. H. Adsett v. J. F. Kells ; claim £31 12s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 30s and two guineas solicitor's fee. O. J. Wickham v. Satnl. Dowdall ; claim 18s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed and 6s costs. Alf. Salter v. Robert Hopkins; claim £5. Mr Beade for plaintiff. This was a claim for damages for assault, plaintiff being struck by defendant with a rolling pin. No appearance of defendant. Judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs 6s. Horace Bastings v. Hoppy ; claim £3 15s. Mr Reade for plaintiff. Defendant made an offer to pay 10s per month, commencing on January 1, which was accepted by plaintiff, and an order was made accordingly. G, Mcßride vA. Lovejov ; claim Ll3 5s Mr Prior for the plaintiff. No ap« pearance of defendant. Mr Whitehouse gave evidence on behalf of the plaintiff, for whom judgment was given with costs 245, and solicitor's fee 21s. Same v T. J. Thompson ; claim L 5 ss. Mr Prior for plaintift. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 10?, and solicitor's fee 21s. W. M. MoClintock vJ. R. Davies. Mr Sandilauds for plaintiff, and Mr Richmond for defendant. This was a claim lor Ll4 10s 6d, but was reduced to L 9 as the original agreement was not stamped ac cording to the provisions of the Act. The plaintiff and defendant were examined at length as to an agreement for bnshfelling, and their evidence as to the boundaries was conflicting McGlintook endeavored to show that he had felled about nine acres more than the contract, 50 acres, for which he was being paid LI an acre. Dayies' evidence was to the effect that more than the contract had not been felled, as on three sides there was grass. A witness, R. Taylor, gave evidence showing that only about three acres outside the boundary had been felled, but, on the other hand, all within the boundary was not cut down. Mr Bastings also gave evidence, counsel having addressed the Court, judgment was given for defendant, each party to pay his own costs.