SUPREME COURT

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 298, 13 June 1912, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

I DIVORCE CASES. | DOES SEPARATION BAR DIVORCE. By Telegraph—Press Association. Dunedin, Last Night. In the Supreme Court to-day decrees nisi were granted in the following cases: Edith Mary McFarlane v. Jas. Mason .McFarlane, for desertion; Amy Douglas v. Chas. Gray Douglas, for desertion; Samuel Finkle v. Mabel Pinkie and John Alfred Shirley (co-respondent), for misconduct. In the case of Margaret McDonald v. John Wilson McDonald, for desertion, the question was raised as to whether a separation order was not a bar to proceedings. His Honor said that it was an important point, and as he was going to Wellington shortly he would consult the other judges. The case will stand over in the meantime.

NEW PLYMOUTH CALENDAR. In contrast to the last session, comparatively little business is set down for the Supreme Court sessions which open at New Plymouth on Monday next. On that day His Honor, Mr. Justice Edwards, will sit in chambers, the Supreme Court proper commencing on Tuesday. There is only one criminal case in the calendar, that of Charles Blundell Lumsden, jun„ who is charged with indecent assault. The case was adjourned from the last sessions. CIVIL CASES. The civil list is as follows.— Trustees Arthur, deceased (Mr. Barton) v. A. H. Arthur (Mr. G. H. Ryan), claim for £llO2 17s 7d, alleged to be owing under a memorandum of mortgage; Robert 11. Wallath (Mr. R. Standish) v. Henry Weston (Mr. T. S. Weston), claim for £2BO, forrepavment of money alleged to have been paid for th% purchase of a motor-ear; Edwin May (Mr. Frank Wilson) v. llenrv Weston (Mr. T. S. Weston), two separate causes of action, involving a claim for £419 4s lid damages for alleged breach of warrant** in respect to a motor-car; Emma Lash (Mr. R. 0. Sellar) v. R, H. TTeappv and wife (Mr. 0. H. .Weston) claim for £2OO damages for moneys alleged to have been advanced by way of loan or as an alternative cause of action for moneys alleged to have been advanced to defendants for inVeetment on behalf of plaintill'. on terms requiring him to account for the same; John H. Wood (Mr. C. H. Weston) v. Frank H. Jellyman (Mr. Quilliam), claim for an order that the defendant account to the plaintiff (his former partner) for certain partnership moneys alleged to be due in respect of the sale of a certain property; Charles Thornton (Mr. A. R. Standish) v. John Palletti (Mr. Quilliam), claim for £244 (is damages for alleged personal injuries caused by defendant's trap colliding with him while cycling, » ORIGINATING SUMMONSES." Walter R. C. James (Mr. Clark) v. the executors of the will of Mary James, deceased (Mr. Quilliam), application foir an order under the Family Protection <: Act for provision for plaintiff out of the estate; Amelia Tay (Mr. Dix) v. the executors of Elizabeth de la Roche, deceased (Mr. Nicholson), for a declaratory order, interpreting the will of the deceased; Catherine Cameron (Mr. Sellar) v. Public Trustee, as executors of the will of Win. Cameron, deceased, for an order under the Family Protection Act. ARBITRATION. A case is being held in the matter of the Arbitration Act, Boon Bros, and Win. L. Luscombe, summons for the appointment of an arbitrator. DIVORCE. One divorce case is set down for hear-t ing, viz., Grace Hetherington v. Frank William Hetherington, on the grounds that the respondent is a habitual drunkard, and has been habitually guilty of cruelty towards petitioner.