HELENSVILLE S.M. COURT

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 11 December 1914, Page 2

HELENSVILLE S.M. COURT

MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1914 VJB (Before Mr E. H. Page, S.M.) -^ *' CIVIL CASES Judgment was given for tfjMHHK plaintiff in the following cases *~^H^^^| Stewart Bros. Ltd. v Tiin^^^P Makoare and Hiki Peri for £140 15s 2d and costs £7 18s. r Stewart Bros, v R Wickham, £26 11s 3d, costs £3 6s. Stewart Bros, v Pairama Mv, .^, £1 14s sd, costs 10s.. (Leave to T\^B defend was granted if amount is 'wj/^^^ paid into Court within 14 days). Stewart Bros v Whiti Watene, £12 3s Bd, costs £1 18s 6d. Stewart Bros v John Cox, £3 % — 6s Bd,-costs 13s. '%> Meinhold v Rogers, £9 12s, _^^j Several cases were adjou)4^^^^^^^| till next Courld^y^JEehal^JFliP||^BH 1915. !*7t. :I^k^3 LEYDOK V. WIFKLEMA-lt '^Bm*^ This was a case arising out ofSfff -a the hiring of a .horse and gig.-f^S^-jl The horse ran away, smashed the V gig, and then ran into barbed- Jj wire fence, injuring itself so : severely that it had to be dstroyed. The plaintiff, Mr Leydon, *^A. represented by Mr Field, claimed £29 3s in respect of the damages, alleging that the accident was~ *^^^H caused by the negligence of the '- -^^B defendant. Mr Winkle-man, the ' defendant, for whom MrJH^HJ^^j^^H (Jackson and Russell)^^^^^^^^^^^| contended that the ac^^^^^^^^^^^M caused by the v nreJ^^^^^^^^^^^^^H horse, and denied H^^^^^^^^^^^^l plaintiff called thr<^^^^H^^^^^^^| to show that the horselP^^uii^^^^^H and was fit for the purree for^^^^H which it was hired. Ther valued the horse at from £10 up to £17," while die plaintiff himself valued -^^H it at £20- The defendant and his witness (Mr Roche) gave evidence that the horse was fidgety .^3 and that being afraid of an f(N accident they tried to drive it on <J to the road with Mr Roche (the—<- -£7\SB driver) walking alongside. They ' ~^ also admitted that they started -J it before they had opened the j gate. The Magistrate last Court f day had reserved his" decision, '. and on this occasion in giving judgment held that the driving.... >~^ from the ground was in icself a lack of reasonable care and was ,jM responsible for the accident. He ' "^H therefore gave judgment for £21 *■ 10s (valuing the horse at £17), ' with costs £8 15s. . Three prosecutions under the . Defence Act, 1909, were withdrawn, the defendants havingf gone to the front. S^^ - '