RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1334, 26 July 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

Tuesday, 24th July. [Before J. Booth, Esq., R.M.] Ward v. M‘Kay, Teat and Co. This was an action to recover costs for professional services rendered to the above firm. Mr H. E, Kenny appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Nolan for defendants. Mr Kenny having opened the case, called Mr Matthews, who stated that he was the manager of the Gisborne branch of the Bank of New Zealand. He remembered the firm of Robjohn, Teat and Co. Mr Nolan objected to Mr Matthews’s evidence. A very tedious argument hereupon ensued. Numerous authorities were quoted by both aides, which finally resulted in his Worship allowing the evidence to proceed. Mr Matthews resumed—The firm of Robjohn, Teat and Co. had an overdraft of £2,‘JOO. All Davidson’s arrangements came to nothing. Later on Mr Irving came up and made arrangements for securing the bank by stock mortgage, grass lien, &c. There was no written agreements. They had to pay all coats and expenses. Had great trouble with these people, as they tried to shirk payment by every possible moans in their power. Fresh securities were prepared some months later. These deeds (deeds produced) .are signed by Irvine and Teat, but could not swear to Davis’s signature positively. By Mr Nolan—The Bank never pays costs in any case. I generally make arrangements *so that parties pay all costs. The securities are made and drawn up for the benefit of borrowers. The Bank is never responsible for costs. Mr Teat, examined by Mr Kenny—ln September, 1870, was a member of two of the firms--one called Robjohn, Teat and Co., consisting of Robjohn, Davidson, Irvine, & Teat; and another, called M’Kay, Teat and Co., consisting of M’Kay, Teat, Robjohn, Irvine and Davidson. Knew that the firm of Robjohn, Teat and Co. were indebted to the bank £2,900. M’Kay, Teat and Co. were not indebted to the Bank. When he bought the firm of Robjohn, Teat, and Co. in his own name, M‘Kay, Teat Co., assumed all the liabilities, and gave security for overdraft. Expected that the firm had to pay all costs. Was one of those mentioned in the action, and was responsible. By Mr Nolan—Robjohns and Co., of Napier, made all arrangements with the Bank. Mr Ward, barrister, of Gisborne, was practising here in 1879. The bill of costs refers to an action brought by the Bank of New Zealand against Teat and Co. and another against M’Kay, Teat and Co. Was the solicitor in the above actions, Mr Irvine and Mr Matthew's, with himself, arranged that Irvine’s firm w r as to pay his costs. M’Kay, Irvine and Matthews instructed him to prepare these documents. It was always the custom for the firm to pay all costs. In his experience the mortgagor universally pays the costs. Had always asked Mr Irvine to settle, and he never denied the claim until that action was brought. McKay said the amount should be paid. In fact no attempt had bean made to dispute the claim until now. By Mr Nolan—Looked to the whole of the parties concerned f >r payment. Mr Cresswell, managing clerk to Mr Ward—Remembered these deeds were prepared in the office. Had frequently applied to Mr Irvine about these costs, and had never denied the liabilities. Had given him fresh, copies of bill of costs. J had also asked Mr McKay, and he also admitted that the money should be paid. The mortgagor always payed the costs. This closed the plaintiffs case. Mr Nolan submitted that in the plaintiffs had not proved rendering bills of costs, He must bu nonsuited. Mr Kenny said they had brought this action as a broken agreement, and not as client and solicitor, Judgment was reserved. Eio Uohoware was charged yesterday morning on the information of constable Wilson, with assaulting one Ka Moko, with intent to ravish. Considerable evidence w’as taken, which was totally unfit for publication. After the hearing of which His Worship committed the prisoner for trial, at the next sittings of ths Supreme Court to be holded at Gisborne on December next.