SOLICITOR'S LAPSE

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 371, 4 November 1932, Page 5

SOLICITOR'S LAPSE

(Press Assn. — I

WRONGFUL APPLICATION OF CLIENT'S FUNDS AN AUCKLAND CASE

5y Telegra ph — Copyrlght)

Auckland', Thursday. The trial of Charles Stewart Leahy, aged 44 years, solicitor, of Auckland, was coneluded in the Supreme Court, when a verdict of guilty on one charge was returned. Leahy was charged on two counts with fraudulently applying the funds of a client, Fredericlc John Young, to another purpose than that for which he had reeeived them. The amounts were £25 and £114 12s 4d. Accused, who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr. Dickson. Summing up, His Honour pointed out that the essential feature of the case was that the sum of £176 was handed over by Young to Leahy with definite instructions that it should be paid out pro rata for the benefit of Young's creditors, who were pressing him. "What you have to deeide," said His Honour, "is whether accused, after repeiving this money, as trustee, acted honestly or dishonestly." "If yoii deeide that he was not guilty of criminal intent, and had merely got his aceounts irito a muddle, then it is your duty to aequit him. If, in your opinion, the Crown has not established a case, Leahy is entitled to a verdict in his f avour, but taking into account all the f acts of the case, if you deeide he is guilty, then you must have no hesitation in finding the verdict aceordingly." D ealing with the evidence, his Honour *mentioned that Young in evidence had denied having attthorised Leahy to invest his (Young's) moneyi Had th'e money been invested? There was no evidence that it had. When the fegulatiofis regarding the auditing of solicitol's' trfist'aecounts came into -force, it was necessary that these aceounts shoiild be balanced. Eviden'ce regarding Leahy's aceounts was Contrary to this. -The 'jury returned , q verdict of guilty on the seeond eount, that regarding the £114, and- accused was remanded until Monday for sentence.