SHEEP SOLD UNDER DISTRESS WARRANT

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 475, 3 October 1928, Page 2

SHEEP SOLD UNDER DISTRESS WARRANT

ALLEGED WRONGFUL ACT CO-DEFENDANT DISMISSED Alleging that Alfred Buckland and Sons, Ltd., auctioneers, had wrongfully sold 97 sheep by order of Constable A. J. Maiden, baliff of Tuakau, Tema Pouwhar^ Kawene, administrator in the estate of the late Pairama Keena. claimed £246 damages from the company in the Supreme Court this morning. This figure included the value of subsequent lambs and wool. Th sheep were seized by Constable Maiden under a distress warrant in favour of J. S. Allen. storekeeper Pukekohe. against Ben l’airama. a son of the deceased. By order of another judge the constable had been joined as co-defend-ant on the application of Air. J. s. Burt counsel for Buckland. At the commcnccmcnt of this morning's action Jir. T. Holmden. for plaintiff, said he wanted to make it clear that Kewene had never made any claim against the constable. No defence that he might have would affect Buekland’s defence. Air. McVeagh, for Constable Maiden then applied to bo dismissed from the action with costs, Bucklund’s having ‘‘dragged Maiden into Court.” “It is perfectly clear,” said Mr. Justice Smith, “that plaintiff does not claim or li as never claimed asainst th© constable.” The question of costs was reserved until the conclusion of the action. 44 MEDDLING WITH TRUST” Outlining the plaintiff's case Mr. Holmden said that Kewene had b©eii appointed administrator of Keen&'s far mat Rongatiki. Deceased had tlnv< children. Only one, Ben Pairama, was left. When plaintiff was investigating the estate he found certain sheep missing and learned that about 100 had been sold under order of the baliff bv the defendant auctioneers. Counsel claimed that if the sheep belonged to deceased and were vested in plaintiff Buckland’s had meddl<d with trust property and were accountable for conversion. Mr. Burt’s defence was that Ben Pairama was the owner of the sheep sold. After the plaintiffs case had been heard Mr. Burt asked for a non-suit on the grounds that Buckland’s wen* in the same position as Constable Maiden, both being tort-feasors. Tlie plaintiff had elected not to proceed further against him and therefore should discontinue against Bucklands. Secondly, plaintiff had failed to begin his action within the three months required under the Act involved. (Proceeding.)