PUKEKOHE MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 4, Issue 6, 22 January 1915, Page 2

PUKEKOHE MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Tbe usual fortnightly sitting of (he Pukekohe Magistrate s Court was held yesterday before Mr Fraz=r, S.M. UNDEFENDED CASES.

Judgment by default was entered for the plaintiffs in the following cases, viz., W. Roulaton (Mr W. P. Hopkins) v. J. Gardiner, for £2 6s 3d and costs 16s; Mrs Dix v. T. Chiplin, for £6 6s 9d and cost! 8s; Eames and Cargill v. H. H. Standing (Papakura), for 16s and costs b's; Same v. A. W. Watson (Papakura), for £1 12s 6d and coats ss; Same v. D. E. Morrison (Hunua), for £1 3s 10 and costs ss. RELATIVES AT VAIANCE.

Thos. Boyle v. J as. Edward Dromgool was a claim for £52 la 8d in respect of cattle bought by the plaintiff on behalf of his nephew, the defendant, who had not paid for them. Mr Peak, of Auckland, appeared for plaintiff, who is a school teacher at Stratford, and Mr P. E. Dromgool represented the defendant, a a farmer, at Tuakau. Defendant counter-claimed for £149 10s for labour, and materials supplied at Boyle's' farm at Pipitoa, Hauraki Plains, and in respect of alleged breach of agreemerit by Boyle selling the tarm and depriving defendant of its possession contrary to arrangement. After the luncheon interval Mr Peake announced that the parties bad come to an amicable arrangement and judgment by consent was entered for plaintiff for £35 withuut costs.

UNPAID DOCTOR'S BILL. Kobt. Glasgow, farmer, of Puni, was sued for £1 103 by Ut A. Bronte, of Pukekobe, in respect of medical attendance, in March, 1913, upon the late Mrs Davis whilst that lady was stopping at the house of defendant (her son-in-law) The defence was that Dr Bronte wa? not called in by defendant but by Miss Davis, one ot Mrs Davis's daughters.—Mr Endean appeared for Dr Bronte and Mr Alexander for defendant.—The plaintiff was non-suited, buttbe Magistrate in refusing to allow costs to defendant remarked that he did bo as he considered that the defendant should have informed the Doctor as to the person to whom the account should have b«en sent. CHIMNEY BUILDING CASE. George Attewell (Mr Endean) v. D. Daltoa (Mr Mahoney) was a claim for a balance of £2 2s in connec* tion with the building of a chimney by defendant's instructions.— The defence was that the charge was both excessive and had been partially paid.—Judgment was entered tor plaintiff for 30s and costs lis.