Feilding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 49, 23 August 1894, Page 2

Feilding S.M. Court.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr Brabant, S.M ) The Deputy Official Assignee in J. C. Morey's estate v. H. Saunderson; claim, 15s 2d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs os. Same v. D. VV. A. Henderson ; claim, £2 7s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 10s, solicitor's fee ss. Dr J. Sorley v. R. K. Bradbury ; claim, £2 2s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed, with costs 11s, and solicitor's fee ss. M. Drury v. G. Phippen ; claim, £2 12s 6d. Mr Reade for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs ss, and solicitor's fee ss. Alexander Managh v. F. Chell ; claim, £1 2s 6d. Mr Sandilands for amount claimed, with costs 11s. J. Thompson v. E. Hatfield ; claim, £17 5s lid. Mr Saudilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs 15s, solicitor's fee, 15s 6d. J. Hopkins v. R. Perrett ; claim, £55 ss. Mr Prior for plaintiff and Mr Hankins for defendant. This was a claim for forty-two week's wages, at 25s a week, from February 1893 to February 1894. John Hopkins, deposed : Kept no books as to dates on which he worked for other people while staying with defendant, for whom he went to work in February, 1893, and stayed with him till February, 1894 ; the ten weeks not charged for was omitted because witness had worked for some days for neighbours. Nathaniel Rich, deposed ; Employed plaintiff at one time for 25s a week ; this was exclusive of board and lodging. Samuel Knight, deposed : Saw plaintiff looking after defendant's property at Cainpbelltown, and believed he was managing it. This was the case for the plaintiff. In opening the case for the defence Mr Hankins said that plaintiff was a dependant of defendant's and had no claim against him. Robert Perrett, deposed : Built a cottage at Oampbelltown for plaintiff to live in, which he did for two years ; after that time plaintiff left and went to work for Mr Rich ; plaintiff went back to live on witness' property, and was .supplied with anything he required ; repudiated any claim against witness by plaintiff. In cross-examination no new evidence was adduced. Fanny Perrett, wife of defendant, gave evidence. His Worship, in giving judgment for defendant, said it was clear that plaintiff had no claim against defendant, w[)o treated him as well as a relative. B. Poole v. D. McKenzie ; claim £36 16s. Mr Reade for plaintiff, and Mr Sandilands for defendant. (Left Sitting.)