MAGISTRATES COURT

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 1064, 2 November 1911, Page 2

MAGISTRATES COURT

CIVII, CASES. Judgment for plaintiffs was entered up in the following undefended civil cases:— R. \V. Wilson v. T. E. Wanklyu, claim ,£4 9s yd, costs 10s ; C. J. Johnston v. J. Burr, ys 6d, costs 15s; Evans Bros. v. A. Reeve, £1 Ss 6d, costs ys ; H. C. Patterson v. W. C. Howan, £2 9s 3d, costs ns; M. PI. Walker v. F. Walls, ,£1 6s 6d, costs ss. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES.

In the case G. T. Woodroofe (Mr Moore) v. Sidney Wright, the judgment debtor did not appear, and was ordered to pay the sum of £1 13s forthwith, in default three days’ imprisonment in Palmerston North prison.

G. H. Stiles proceeded against R. H. Dalhousie on a judgment summons. The judgment debtor was examined as to his earnings since the judgment was entered, after hearing which the Magistrate refused to make an order.

A. W. Brown proceeded againt William Plainer on a judgment summons to recover the sum of £27 iSs, judgment tor which had been obtained in July. William Hamer stated the amount was for a uumber of perambulators that he had purchased from Rockheart. Rimited. He paid for them by means of a promisory note. Prior to the due date of the p.n. be forwarded a cheque for the amount. Apparently Rockheads, Rimited, had discounted his p.n. with Brown and when they received his (Hamer’s) cheque they did not redeem his p.n. from Brown. The bill became due and on presentation was dishonoured. Brown then proceeded against him for the recovery of the amount and judgment was entered up. He did not owe the money, having paid it to Rockheads, with whom the debt was contracted.

The Magistrate said he could not go into that matter. Mr Hamer’s proper course would be to move to have the judgment set aside.

The judgment debtor was then examined by Mr Cooper and said that his wite had a drapery business and he assisted her. The billiard room belonged to his wife. He was at present running it for her, and she got the prohts. He just took what money he required for his personal use. The motor business was owned by his son. He asked that the case be adjourned in order that he could communicate with Lock heads. The Magistrate said that he would have to take it that as the judgment debtor was working for his wife he was receiving ordinary wages. In order that a settlement might be arrived at he would adjourn the case until the 29th inst. Mr Cooper asked in case of no settlement being arrived at with Lockheads what order the Magistrate might be prepared to make.

The Magistrate said in that case he would vary the judgment to make the amount payable by instalments of £2 per month. H REACH OK MAINTENANCE ORDER. James Harper, junr., was charged with failing to obey a maintenance order in respect to his father. Mr R. Moore appeared lor the father James Harper senr., and Mr Cooper tor defendant, James Harper junr. The arrears amounted to £9 2s, but Mr Moore said the plaintiff was willing to forego his claim to £3 16s of this amount if the defendant would pay the balance, £3 6s. After hearing the defendant’s evidence the Magistrate convicted the defendant and sentenced him to 14 days imprisonment, the order to be suspended if the sum of £3 6s be paid within fourteen days. Solicitor’s fee of £1 xs was allowed. BREACH OE PROHIBITION ORDER. Robert A. Burnett, was charged with purchasing liquor during the currency of a prohibition order. Defendant admitted procuring the liquor but denied purchasing it. The information was amended to read procure instead of purchase and the defendant then pleaded guilty and was convicted and fined xos with costs 7s and witness' expenses 23s 6d.