RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Manawatu Times, Volume IV, Issue 45, 5 June 1880, Page 3

RESIDENT M AGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thttbsdat, jTunb fij, 188.0. [Before the. Resident Magistrate and There were no criminalicas;e»i CIVIL CJLBUB.Thomas Goodison, y.-J.jSouthee. — Claim £1 10^ i 6t i %orse hire. There was no appearance of defendant* and judgment was given m default. ■ ■ ■■: ; E. Sherritt v. Thomas' Bri^htweU.— Claim for 'work and r labor 'done,. De-. fendant did not appear^, but "the'; clerk ' intimated that -an application .-had been made for an.' adjournment ; m .order to have defendant's evidence taken at fiawera where he now was. A.. S. B. Porsifcer yM. Peck-4-Claim" 10/- for court fees. Tht i-defenclaut had laid an information agaihs-t a. person for smashing, his windows, aijd not having . ihe CourJß^ees' th'e clerk very kindly advanced the moneyoutof his bwn^ppeket a kindness subsequently re-paid- by de-" fendant by repudiating* all liability. Ordered to pay the aiiioun.tn and 16.« .-COStS. ; . "■ . .-.Ui;:i/.i: ; -. -.>■■-■ ■:_•-■■'■.-:■-■■'■' T. Jordan V. TVillianj Claim JB2 15s. The defendant did npt appear but he had paid; ten shillings in t<> court, fttd plaintiff stated that he -was quite willing to receive the amount b^^ weekly Instalments p| te.n^hillings.' ' David Spaulding ,v.% Joseph, Beale.—r Claiiu £2 'lOs^i being : the amount claimed m lieu of a week's notice;.. The facts of the case were as follows i^The plaintiff was employed as A a butcher with defendant, but haying obtained, another situation he gave, a week's; notice of his m ten tionJ to/;lea;vel; ; defendant accepted' tha,t intimationi b.u,t a day afterwards hefoffered^plaintiff biife 5 iay's wages and told'him he coiild leayeV; as hehad engaged another mani Plain- 1 tiff did so, and by chance got employ* jnent, nevert;lieless~he considered he entitled tQ* yreeJjj 's noticie; apid sued for £2 lOsrin lieu^of same. V. ,•■•; *?:■■. ■■■■'■':,. Mr. Staite wl'io appeared for defendant, statpdv;tha't five shillings or a day's pay had been paid iijto^Court, and claimed a judgment as it was by no jnftVyS binding upon a 'master to gir-e » week's notice^;' , v , , ■„'.-. :■',- ,. .:.-.-. ... . . Tiie ]^fsldint^ V ltfai^s^ratft differed' with counsel upon thai; point, nevertheless as plaintijl^ had ;immedi»te.ly( bb-'. tamed employment, and -consequently suffered no^nss,,, a, judgment -would Jbe/. given for defendant vrfth costs..' 0. E. Capper v. Ibuisa Symons.— CEaim, £^ 19s pd. jfor^gppds., sold and deUTered^^THe'defend^ntt^ho has , a, protection order, admitted iiabjility to, extent of 16sV W\ 'but stated that" the remainder should be debited to her husbuu^, who, had obtained 5 theTTgaoda for kVespecial use. The Bench , took that Tiew of 'thS". ; c^fleVißdd;g]BJYe'* judgment for amount claimed,' less £2 3s 3d., ■ . . ■ ..XO'i>.i'.U-:-:.t/;'.i '!" h '■'■■"' '