SUPREME COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 14 June 1933, Page 6

SUPREME COURT

SITTING. AT WESTPORT The quarterly sitting opened on Monday betore Mr Justice Blair. : . CASE ADJOURNED A claim by Hugh Hagen against the Public Trustee for £BOO was adjourned . for three months conditionally upon Mr Molony, who appeared for detendaijd, undertaking not to ask for a further adjournment.: -Mr Ji . Morgan appeared lor defendant. THEFT SENTENCE Gladys Mary Holbrook, who was. not represented bv counsel, and who pleaded guilty in the lower Court to three charges of breaking, entering and theft’ at Denniston, appeared for sentence. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr A. A. Wilson, said that £5 13s in casli and £7 10s worth of clothing had been taken from L. Peacock; £2 in cash had been taken from H. Wake; and £4 from Mrs Henderson, who was custodian of the money for a Lodge; and another sum of £4 belonging to J. Somerville had been taken from the house of Mr Finley. A further sum of 8s had been taken from Mrs Newman. Prisoner was admitted to probation for three years and was ordered to re-pay the sum of £lO, being amount stolen, within three months, and to pay "iOs costs within six months. CLAIM FOR INSURANCE

Mrs Janet McNeil, for, whom Mr Morgan appeared, claimed from the Commercial Union Insurance Co (Mr IT. Lovell) , the sum of £350 being the ' Amount for which her house and furniture, destroyed by fire, had been in- : -sured. The, defendant • company com tested the claim on. the grounds that the statement of loss was not true ' and it was also alleged that plaintiff set fire deliberatly to the house. His Honour in giving judgement sail-:. I cannot understand s,> feeble a defence in charging the woman with arson, without bringing evidence in ( ..support thereof. It was an nffrontry to come into tho court with such a feeble defence. 1 never saw such a ease ip my life before and cannot see any suspicj ions element about the fire. I. do not intend to go into any improper defence. There are good claims and bad claims against insurance companies. This is one of the good ones. Mrs McNeil has 1 something to complain about in the | way she lias been treated, with respect jto her claim. Tho insurance company *j beat her down to £;SO on her furniture and £IOO on her house, and then would ■ not pay. The fact that Airs McNeil :< had agreed to take the reduced amount did not .count, as defendant’s own valuer admitted that the property was not Unduly valued.” Judgement was for the full claim of £SOO, with costs as per scale, and all *-

JUSTICE’S FRASER’S RULING. DEATH DURING EMPLOYMENT. (Per Frets Association — OopyArijht ) AUKLANI). .Tune 14. “It cannot be stated too definitely and emphatically that the mere facr. that a man dies at his work is not in itself sufficient proof that his death is due to an accident arising from his employment,’ ’said Mr Justice Frazer. In his reserved judgment to-clay lie rejected tho claim for £IOOO damages made by the widow of a lurry driver who was found dying on the roadside beside his lorry. He said that deceased was in such a condition that lie might have died at any time, and it had not been proved that death was accelerated by his work.

For CVmgh > and never fnil«. WOODS’ CREAT PEPPERMINT CURE.