Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A REMARKABLE CASE.

A SOLICITOR'S CONDUCT.

(Per Press Association.) Dunedin, last night. The Supreme Court was ongagec yosterdayina case in which an applica tion was mado to make absolute a rub

nisi calling on E. Z. Moore to 9how i cause why he should not bo struck off tte roll o£ solicitors, or why ho should not be suspended from practico on the $ grounds of alleged professional misconduct. W. O. Macgregor, who appeared for Moore, said it was difficult to find out what tho charges were. What be gathered was that Moore (•took proceedings against Mark Rogers, coal merchant, on a judgment summons without authority, and that ho continued tho proceedings after tlio withdrawal of any implied authority. Moore had boen engaged to collect certain overdue calls to the Prince Arthur Dredging Co., amongst others •from Rogers. Ho endeavored to enforce payment by an attachment order, hut tho liability was evident. Matters I drifted on. The company wont into I liquidation. The, assots were sold tc I a new company, and a liquidator ap I pointed. On the strength of previous I instructions a judgment summons hue I -' been taken out against Rogovs, and i

was the latter who wont to tlio Law Society. Mr Macgrogor, in the course of his address, contended (I) that F. Z. Mooro had nothing to (to with tho issue of tho summons, but simply signed papers placed boioio him by clerks in tho ordinary routine of office business ; C2). that ho had to roly on his clerks for instructions fiom tho liquidator; (3) that Moore genuinely believed in good faith lie was acting under instructions from Mr McCrackol, tho liquidator. Ho thought it monstrous that a, man should bo brought beforo tho Court, and held up to public obloquy on a penal charge because a defaulting defendant had rofttsod, owing- to a technicality in connection with the proceedings, to pay a just debt. Mr A. S. Adams having been hoard, on behalf of the Law Society, Mr Justice Williams said ho would give a writton decision.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19051215.2.30

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1627, 15 December 1905, Page 3

Word Count
342

A REMARKABLE CASE. Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1627, 15 December 1905, Page 3

A REMARKABLE CASE. Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1627, 15 December 1905, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert