Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

R.M. COURT, TEMUKA.

Wednesday, June 30th. .Before F. Guinness, Esq, R.M. WHITE V BROWN (Trustee in the estate of Martin Dunn, a bankrupt) Claim £5-1. Plaintiff conducted his own case, and Mr Austin appeared for defendant From the evidence it appeared that M Dunn executed a bill of sale of his property in favor of plaintiff for £IOO LSO of the amount was paid off, then Dunn became a bankrupt, and defendant was appointed trustee The plaintiff then sent bis bailiff to take possession under the said bill of sale, but the defendant refused to allow the property to be removed and ordered the plaintiff's bailiff off the farm The disputed property was afterwards sold by defendant

For the deft nee, Mr Austin said a prior bill of sale had been given by Dunn to Messrs Jonas, Hart and Witdie over the same property : Martin Dunn swore that he gave a bill of sale to Jonas, Hart and. Wildie for L7O, and that it was nevsr paid off, but that it was afterwards transferred to j Ifendelson, who paid Jonas, Hart and Wildie L7O. charging the amount to his current account He hadn't paid Mr Mendelson

Defendant stated that the amount realised by the sale of the bankrupt’s property w.- # Ll2O

Julius Mendelson said he paid Jonas, Hart and Wildie L7O and the bill was transferred to him, and held it as collateral security fo r Dunn’s current account wit h him He had charged Dunn with the amount paid He had received L 493 from Dunn since the transfer of the bill, but Dunn still owed him L 69 odd He did not take any steps to contest his bill, as he thought it was not good enough to fight the trustee

Mr Austin then addressed the Bench at considerable length, contending that as tl • plaintiff did not take any steps under his bill of sale till after the trustee was appointed his claim must be considered as abandoned, even jf he had any right Ho said that the property was included in the bill transferred to Mr Mendelson, who had given it up to defendant, and that the trustee, therefore, was the right owner At this stage His Worship adjourned the case till next Wednesday.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18800703.2.6

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Temuka Leader, Issue 269, 3 July 1880, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
377

R.M. COURT, TEMUKA. Temuka Leader, Issue 269, 3 July 1880, Page 2

R.M. COURT, TEMUKA. Temuka Leader, Issue 269, 3 July 1880, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert