SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 May 1920, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.

YESTERDAY'S SESSIONThe quarterly sessions of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth were continued yesterday before his Honor Mr. Justice Chapman. DIVORCE PETITION. Tiie ease of Frederick Morshead (MrC. H. Croker) v. Clara Morshead (Mr. C. H. Weston) was brought on as an undefended petition by the husband for the dissolution of the marriage, Mr. Weston stating he had been instructed to withdraw the wife's defence and also licr cross-petition, and make no application as to costs. After hearing further evidence a decree nisi was granted, to .be made absolute in three months.

CAMPBELL v. PATTERSON AND OTHERS. The case of Alexander Campbell (Mr. P. C. Spratt) v. Constance Patterson, Mrs. Gilbert and Messrs. Welsh and McCarthy (Mr. D. Hutchen), in which plaintiff claimed £l5O as the balance of the purchase price of the goodwill of a sub-lease of a certain section of land, and defendants counter-claimed against plaintiff k respect to certain alleged breaches ot covenant, was continued yesterday morningAfter hearing further evidence and counsels' addresses his Honor reserved his decision. IN CHAMBERS. BROCKETT v. WILLIS. An application was made, yesterday in the case of Brockett and another, v. Willis, to have the evidence of Dr. Milroy, at present in England, taken on commission. The action is one in which the plaintiffs are attacking the will of John Willis, of Kapuni, deceased, on the ground that the testator was mentally incapable of making a will, and on the further ground of undue influence. The are nieces of the testator. Mr. O'Dea, for the plaintiffs, opposed the application, as he thought that Dr. Milro.v's evidence should be taken in New Zealand, he being one of the attesting witnesses. Counsel said that the plaintiffs had two medical witnesses, who would testify as to the tetator's incapacity and it 'would be better if all the medical witnesses were heard together. His Honor made the order for the commission, hut imposed the condition that the defendant's solicitor should cable Dr. Milroy as to when lie would return to the Dominion. # Mr. D. Hutchen (instructed by Mr. A. 0. Bennett, Manaia) appeared for the defendant.

BUCKLAND v. GIBSON AND BUCKLAND. This was an application Tinder the Family Protection Act. The plaintiff was the widow of the deceased John Richard Bucklawl. late of Hawera- The deceased by his will had left his property to four children of his first marriage with a life interest to iiis widow, who was his second wife. His Honor said that he thought counsel should come to some arrangement. Later counsel stated that they had agreed that ho present order should be made but that a suspensory order should take effect to protect the rights of the widow should her financial position alter in the future. Costs were allowed both plaintiff and defendants out of the estate. Mr. F. C- Spratt appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. O'Dea (instructed by Mr. James Foy) for the defendants. DISPOSAL OF OTHER CASES. In arranging for the hearing of the remaining cases it was agreed that the following should stand over until another judge should come to New Plymouth, or until the .next sessions of the Court: — CIVIL CASES. Charles A. P. Wood v. Mary Ann Bailey, claim for performance of contract, possession of property, and £IOO damages. Ann Manning v. Ira James Bridger, claim for £ 112 for wrongful taking possession of chattels (defended). In the ease of Cross and others v. Oliver Cross, a claim for possession of land and £37 ii mesuc profits, Mr. Croker mentioned that possession had been obtained and the only matter for settlement was the amount of damages, which counsel had agreed should be argued at the next sitting of the Court. ORIGINATING SUMMONS. Edwin Dixon and another v. Frederick Martin and others, summons for interpretation of will. APPEALS. Alexander Cumberland McDonnell (appellant) Iv. Hugh Douglas Armour (respondent), appeal under Licensing Act from determination of Wyvern Wilson, Esq., S.M.. at Patea. Thomas William .Tames (appellant) v. Joseph Crocket and Martha Smith (respondents), under Magistrate's Court Act from the decision of T. A. B. Bailey, Esq., S.M., at New Plymouth. Eric Kilroy (appellant) v. Jessie Victoria Mary Tapp (respondent), under Destitute Persons' Act, appeal from determination of T. A. B. Bailey, Esq-, S.M., at Hawera.