SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume V, Issue 63, 16 March 1870, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

[Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond]. JRitching s v. Monro Brothers. Our yesterday's report concluded with the evidence for the -defendants. The counsel on both sides haviDg addressed the jury, the Judge summed up strongly in favor of the plaintiff, for whom the jury, after an absence of two hours, returned a verdict on all the issues, which we give below, together with the finding of the jury thereon. 1. Did the plaintiff and the defendants in or about the month of May, 1869, agree together that the plaintiff should enter iuto the service of the defendants, and did the plaintiff enter into such service ? Yes. 2. Did the defendants in or about the month of September wrongfully dismiss the plaintiff from such service ? Yes. 3. To what damage is the plaintiff entitled in respect of the wrongful dismissal ? £25. 4. Are the defendants indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of £35, or in any other sum in respect of the matter set forth in the second and third count! of the declaration ? £15.

5. Did the defendant, Alexander Monro in or about the month of September, with the privity and consent of the defendant, George Monro, falsely and maliciously and without reasonable and probable cause charge the plaintiff and cause him to be apprehended and arrested and imprisoned as in the plaintiff's declaration mentioned? Yes. 6. To what damages (if any) is the plaintiff entitled in respect of such arrest and imprisonment ? £50.