MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2125, 15 December 1880, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTO a UROH. Tuesday, Dbcembeb 14. fßefore J. OUivier and J. Crosby, Esq., J.P.’s.] Oith Casks. —Neave v Clarke, claim £4 17s. Mr Salter appeared for defendant. The account between the parties, originally amounting to £l2 7s, was entrusted by plaintiff to the late Matthew Henderson to collect. The latter had only accounted to plaintiff for £7 10s, and the balance was now sued for. Defendant produced proof that he had paid Henderson £ll 10s, and judgment was given for plaintiff for 17s, plaintiff to pay costs. Deign v Barnett, £5, for damages sustained by the cutting down of part of a quick dividing fence. Mr Wilding for plaintiff. Mr M'Connel for defendant. The parties were gardeners living on adjoining sections. Plaintiff allowed the fence to grow to a height of ten feet, which overhanging defendant’s land become a nuisance, and was by him chopped down. After hearing evidence, the Bench were of opinion that no damage bad been done, and the case was dismissed, each to pay their own costs. Davis v Fiske, £2 11s fid, for commission on the sale of sewing machines. Mr Joyce for plaintiff, Mr Oowlishaw for defendant. Plaintiff alleged that he was engaged by defendant to sell the “Davis Vertical Feed ’’ machine, at 10 per cent, commission on the selling price. Having sold three, plaintiff applied for the commission, which was refused, and the present action was the result. The evidence of Mr and Mrs Fiske showed that the machines for the sale of which' commission was claimed’were not sold by plaintiff, and that there had been no engagement with him as he alleged. Judgment for defendant, plaintiff to pay costs, and the expenses of one witness. lanes v Kemp, £7 7s, for balance due on a current account. Defendant proved that plaintiff was all wrong in his account, and judgment was given for plaintiff for £1 Os fid only, plaintiff to pay costs. Wallace v Ricks, £ls, balance due on a contract for carpenter’s work done in the erection of two cottages. Mr Izard for plaintiff ; Mr Salter for defendant. Plaintiff alleged that after partially completing his contract his work was stopped for want of material, which defendant failed to supply, and offered him a sum of money for the work he had done, which was not sufficient remuneration. The plaintiff denied having occasioned any delay, but the evidence bore out plaintiff’s statement, and a verdict was given in his favor for £l3, defendant to pay costs, the expenses of one witness and solicitor’s fee. Avon Road Board v Snelling, £2 6» 8d for rates. Defendant admitted the debt, but said that the account bore on its face an order to pay the same on demand. It had been sent by post, and he thought it ought to have been brought to him by the collector, whom he said he was not going to hunt up for the purpose of paying. The Court pointed out that, however distasteful it was to him, the law expected him to do so. The course he had chosen to take only saddled him with considerable additional expense. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. Rogers ▼ Kerinsb, £2 15s, for board and lodging ; judgment for plaintiff with costs. Judgment went by default for plaintiffs, with costs, in City Council v Andrews, £2 12s; same v Ferguson, £1 2s 3d ; same v Dowall, 13s; Deacon v Hargetts, £1 9s; Davis v George, £3 12s ; McOlatchie v Hargetts, £3 Is; Heathcote Road Board v Nankivell, £1 7s ; same v Bulmer, £2 ; Lewis v Schroder, 14s; Moffat v Marsden, £l3 5s 9d; Williams v Currie, £S Is; Spence v Harris, £2 ; Britton v Wicksteod, £lO 5s ; and Angel and Hankins v Vickers, £3 8s fid. Innes v Milsom was adjourned till December 21st.

Wednesday, Deceicbbb 15. [Before J. Nugent Wood, Esq., R.M.j Maintenance of Ohildbbn. —William Smith, on remand . from Tuesday, was brought up and ordered to pay 10s a week towards the support of his three children in Dunedin; £2 to be paid in advance. Onmi Oases.—U. Mason v Towenend, £24 Is 9d, and Christian v Groves and March, £ll 6s 2d, judgment wae given for plaintiffs with costs. In Davis v Boby plaintiff was nonsuited with costs. Hargreaves v Sharp was adjourned till December 22nd; Fowler v Schroder and Millet v Xraves till January 12tb, 1881.