Feilding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 99, 23 October 1896, Page 2

Feilding S.M. Court.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr R. L. Stanford, S.M.) Kirton aud Curtts v. Francis T. Clark '> claim for LI 19s 6d, costs on a claim of Ll2. Mr Randilands for plaintiffs. Judgment f; r costs. Win. l J L'arson v. Alice McAlistev ; claim 16.s o:l, Mr Sanclilands for the plain Uff. Ju('gmentfor amount claimed with costs r>a. i W. B. Retcineyer vK. H Cuniu£'iam ; claim LIJ IBs. Mr Cathro for plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed, with I costs. Thoruas Moffatt v. Samuel Hunter ; claim LH 19s 9d. Judgment for amount claimed, wit.li costs S.s. Henry "VV. Davy v. Wm. Arnott ; claim L 4 17s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs ss. 11. J. Thompson v. H. Coylo ; claim L 6 4s. Mr Catbro for plaintiff. Judgment, for amount claimed, with costs 9s, and solicitor's i'oc 15s 6d. Thomas Moffatt v. Thoruas Morgan ; a judgment summons, claim L 4 Is 6d. Pa.\ mout to be made at the rate of LI a month. J. S. Freeman v. W. Baker. In this case, Mr Cathro argued that tho Magistrate had no power to grant L 5 as costs as applied for by the solicitor for the plaiutiff, on the ground that leave to proceed with the judgment had not beeu given by the Court at Feilding ; also, that the order for prohibition by the Supreme Court had never been rescinded. Mr JLianes had not applied at the Feilding Court for leave to proceed on the judgment. His Worship held that section 167 of the Magistrate's Act empowered a S.M., wbt>n appellant does not proceed wifch his appeal with due diligence, to allow respondent his costs. He allowed L 5 5s solicitors fee as applied for by Mr Innes, solicitor for the plaintiff. Pohangina County Council v. A. W. Skerman ; claim L2O 17s 2d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff and Mr Cooke for defendant. Mr Cooke submitted that the defendant having given notice as required by section 52 of the Rating Act of the sale of two of the sections for which he had been rated, he was not liable on these two but admitted liability for two sections. Mr Sandilands contended that under section 35 and other sections of the Rating Act that Skerman should have objected to his name being on the roll, not having done so he was excluded from now objecting. Mr H. J . Hayns, the late clerk, suppoened by the Pohangina County Council but was not examined. Judgment was given for tbe Council with costs but did not allow witnesses expenses, He said they could not go behind the valuation roll, and that it was the imperative duty of the seller to see that that the buyer's name was substituted on tbe roll for his. John Reid and Co v Dixou and Horsnell; claim L3l 19s. This was an application to take evidence and was adjourned on the application of Mr Sandiland for the defendant. Mr Richmond was for the plaintiff. Solicitors fee of LI Is was allowed to Mr Richmond. William Duggan v. Emma Wildbore. Mr Reade appeared for the prosecutor and Mr Sandilands for the defendant. This was a charge of illegally impounding a horse on Bth of October at Taonui. | The prosecutor stated that be was drivi ing his horse home when a dog frigbt- ! ened it. Tue aaimait ran agamsi tbe defendant's gate, broke it down and got I into her ground. He offered to repair the gate but the defendant demanded either a new gate or she would impound the horse. Ho refased to pay the sum demanded but subsequently paid the poundkeeper 15s to release tbe horse. Judgment was given for defendant with witness' expenses 25s 9d, costs of court 4s, and solicitor's fee 21s. Jos Clementson was charged on the information of the Borough Inspector, Mr F. Flavall, with selling unwholesome fruit, viz., bananas and oranges. In examination the Inspector admitted tbe oranges were not unwholesome aud His Worship said he would have to dismiss the case as tbe information was, therefore, irregular. G. J. Scott, D.O.A. iv the estate of D. Ross, v. R. Linton ; claim L 4 14s Bd. Mr Reade for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 143. Pohangina County Council v. James Harvey ; claim L 4 Is lOd for rates. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 21s and solicitor's fee 265. Defendant said tho Council were owing him money for busbfelling on road line, but Mr S&ndilands argued that this could not be set against rates and that the work was undertaken on the understanding it was to bo paid for when the road was opened for traffic. B. Johnson v. C. Wapp ; claim Qh. Mr Sandilands for defendant contended that the money had been tendered to plaintiff by defendant, who was poundkeeper at Balcombe, but he wouldn't accept it. Tbe case was nonsuited with costs Is sd. (Left sittinp.)