SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 5 July 1907, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

It 0 11 NEW PLYMOUTH, THURSDAY, ~ JULY 4. e - Before His Honor, Air. Justice Button u "1 ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE. ■ a The hearing of the action, Moyuihai v. llanierton for £2BO damages for al t . leged negligence was continued, in The defendant, (Jervasc Distiey Ham ut" erlon, gave evidence mainly on the line: ,s of the statement of defence. Witucsi ie said he had borrowed money for variom ~ persons from Aloynihan. Had never act 10 ed as solicitor for Moynihan. When In ri> negotiated the loan for Graves, he knev r Graves to be a man of coiisiderabi re means. A confidential statement of as t sets and liabilities showed Graves to b about .C7UOO to the good. Some tim after the interview with Moyuiluiu i e>r witness's oiiice, witness went to Moyni ol ban's bouse. Aloynihan chose the morl )n gage' on the property of Arthur Bliss a a Kaponga, and agreed to advance th ie £2BO. Air Moyniliau at first took excep p tion to the security. Witness said th y. property had been sold for betweei ,-,» three and four hundred pounds, and th ■_v debt o.f £2BO had been allowed to re i B main on the land by Mr Graves, who wa n- an old banker, and a shrewd busiues man. Airs Aloynihan was called in. Sh objected to the security on the sol ir ground that they had not seen the land lo After she left, Aloynihan accepted th >d mortgage. AYlien Mrs Moynihan askci :p witness whether lie would'be willing fc ie lend bis own money, he replied that h id would be willing lo do so if he had th n- money. Witness denied having said t, .." Aloynihan, "Con, can't you trust me witl ;s . this money?" He also denied other al id ie fe" 0(1 conversation purporting to sho\ ,;, that Aloynihan took the mortgage on hi ,„ (Hnincrton's) recommendation. Wftnes did no! undertake to collect interest am principal on the mortgage for Moynihan n- Witness gave further evidence regardinj -, the relations between himself and Jfoj al nihan.

Herbert Graves said that he bought the section in question for £l2O, and Mild it lo Bliss for £330. He at first asked Cl5O. He gave Hamerton the information which the latter disclosed to the Moynihans.

Fred. .). Cowern, clerk to the Kaponga t Town Hoard, gavo evidence of recent pro- . pcrty sales in tlie vicinity of this sec- , tiou. In 1003 tin's section was worth t £1 a fool to an outside speculator if it were sold him on paper. Cross-examined: He had bought five acres on the other side of the road for t."il2. He might buy the property In , dispute, but only on the condition that he was given his own terms for payment, lie might have bought for £2BO in 1003 if he had a purchaser waiting. Counsel! addressed the Court at some length. His Honor prefaced his remarks by referring to the very clear and careful iniinner in which the case had been presented to the jury by both counsel. The seven issues submitted to the jury were, lircily, as follows, with the answers: (1) Did the defendant act for plaintitr in mortgage or other transactions prior to February, 1903? Yes. (2) Did the defendant act for plaintiff in the loan to Graves!— Yes. (3) Was there a contractual relationship between plaintill' and defendant as solicitor and client at the time of negotiating the loan to (i raves ?—Yes. (4) Did the defendant undertake to advance the plaintiff as to the sufficiency of the. security '!— Yes. (5) Was the security sufficient>—No; the jury found that in 1003 the security was worth 1.7,5. (0) If the defendant recommended the security, did he act as an ordinarily prudent man?— No. (7) Did the plaintiff rely on the representations made by tin; defendant as to the security!— Yes. (8) What damages (if any) is the plaintill' entitled to recover? The jury was out from 5.30 to 7 p.m. Mr. Spence applied for judgment for plninliir in terms of the verdict. Judgment was given accordingly for C 225; costs on the middle scale; disbursement to be fixed by the Registrar.