Feilding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 10, 12 July 1894, Page 2

Feilding S.M. Court.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr Brabant, S.M ) C. 11. Lance v. Alex. Parker ; claim XI o. Air Satidilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 245, solicitor's fee 15s Gd. C. Matthews v. W. S. Stanton ; clsiiui 17s Gd. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs Gs. Maria Oliver v. L. Grammar ; claim £2. MrSandilandsfor plaintiff. Judgment for anount claimed, with costs 3s, solicitor's fee ">s. E. H. Crabb v. Win. Sorby ; a judgment summons claim £2 lGs Gd. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Ordered to be paid at the rate of 10s a month, the first payment to be made this day fortnight. John Glover v. Edwin Browning ; claim £5 14s 6d. Mr Readefor plaintiff. The plaintiff gave evidence to prove that he had paid defendant 10s conduct money. On the ground that defendant did not attend, it was ordered that the claim should be paid within fourteen days, or in default seven days' imprisonment. John Glover v. Joseph Burne ; claim £21 5s Id. Mr Reade for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 30s, solicitor's fee £1 11s. Judgment was given the case R. R. Collins and the D.O.A. in the bankrupt estate of P. Rugsted v. Ellis Bros, and Valder, of Hunterville. This was a case in which plaintiffs sued defendants for the recovery of a mare, or its al eged value £31 10s, sold to defendants by Peter Rugsted, in December last. Defendants paid £17 10s for the mare, which sum was paid to Collins with another amount. Rugsted had borrowed £100 from Collins, and gave certain horses and chattels as security. The sum of £88 10s had been repaid to Collins. The horses aud chattels still in possession of Rugsted were of sufficient value to cover plaintiff Collins claim. It was argued for the defence that plaintiff had no claim over the mare, considering the time that had elapsed since it was sold to defendaufo, and that Rugsted had still sufficient property Jeft to satisfy the claim. There was a doubt if plaintiffs had any claim over the mare, as defendants were iv iguorance of the lieu on it when they purchased it, although Rugsted had done wrong in selling. Looking nt tho fact that it was not altogether for the benefit of Collins that the action had been taken, but for the benefit of tho creditors in Rugsted's bankrupt estate, His Worship nonsuited plaintiffs. Solicitor's fee, £2 Hi, WuM allowed. Mr Richmond received judgment foi Zlv Meldrum, solicitor for defendants, aud "Mr Saudilauds for plaintiffs. Mrs Cockery, made an application for jijaintenauco agaiust her husband, Jeremjah Corkevy, of Bunnythorpe. Mr Saadiiaftds appeared in support of the application. After hearing Mrs Cockejry's evidence, Mr Cockeyy was exainiued as to his ability k> contribute. He expressed a willingness to pay half of what he earned—viz. , 11s a*week. An order was accordingly made that defendant should pay 5s 6kl a-week for mainfceuaaee. Witness expenses, 6s, and solicitor's foe, 10s 6d, were allowed. J. Warburton v- J. Ranson aud Son ; claim, £38 10s. Mr Richmond for plaintiff, aud Mr Sandilands for defendant. This was a claim for the recovery of .£3O alleged to be due on a coutract for cutting 100 cords of wood at 6s a cord, and for £3 10s loss of time aud expenses. A coutra claim was put in by defendants, and £5 was paid iuto Court. (Left Sitting. 1