APPEAL COURT.
FALSE PRETENCES? ■ By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The Appeal Court to-day took ' the case of Kex v. Muir, a Crown case reserved for the opinion of the Appeal Court. Prisoner had been convicted of fraudulently obtaining cheques and converting them to his own use, and of theft of cheques,, while employed at Longburn Freezing Works. The main question for consideration of the Court was whether Muir was guilty of theft or of obtaining money by false pretences, and llhere were other cognate points following on these. The SolicitorGeneral appeared for the Crown, but the prisoner was unrepresented. The argument is unfinished.
PIRiANI v. PIRANI. Wellington, Last Night. In the appeal case, Pirani v. Pirani, telegraphed on Saturday, the defence, which was not mentioned in the .message at the time, was that Mr. Pirani objected to contribute twice, namely, to maintain his children himself, and has also to pay his wife for their maintenance. This was telegraphed on Monday, but has not been published by a number of papers at. all, and by others incorrectly, and is now sent again with a renuest for publication, in fairness to Mr. Pirani.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19100714.2.45
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 81, 14 July 1910, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
192APPEAL COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 81, 14 July 1910, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in