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

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Trmuka—W ednssdat, March 31, 1886.

[Before J. Beswick, Esq< f R.M.] DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. A first offender was fined 5a fo£ this offence. V

CIVIL CASES. P. O’Meara v. Temuka Linseed Co. ** —Claim £56 5s fid.

Mr Lynch appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Aspinal! for defendants. In this case His Worship delivered judgment. He said the question really was whether O’Meara and Dunn were partners or not. It appeared to him O’Meara had proved he had been ft partner, and consequently the surviving partner had a right to recover the amount of the contract. With regard] to the order given by Dunn to Mrj Brown, it could not be recognised,! Dunn had no right to give an order tol pay his private debts out of the partner* ship money. He would give judgment for the amount claimed and costs.

Mr Aspinall reminded the Court that the Company never objected to paying the money, and that the reason it wu deferred was, because the Company did not know who to pay. He would ask the Court on this ground not to allow costs.

His Worship said the judgment must carry costs with it. Miller r. G. Meredith—Claim jilt 12s 4d,

Mr Tosswill appeared for the plain* tiff and Mr Aspiaall for defendant.

In this case £8 lis 4d bad been paid into Court and a set-off for £4 17a put in. It appeared from the evidence that two m rt n named Miller and Mailer, had ft contract for harvesting from Meredith. Mr Mailer Was paid the amount due to him, and a dm pate arose b.-lween plaintiff and defendant about £1 10 < which the defendant alleged he gave plaintiff at Winchester. The plaintiff denied having received the £1 lOs, and sued the defendant for the full araoun'. The defendant then added to the £1 10-t cash lent, 15s for hire of horse and buggy, a sum for hire of horse, and other items, which brought the get-off up to £4 !7s. Three witnesses were examined, and after a patient hearing judgment wai given for £ll 15f 4d with costs. The Court then rose.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18860401.2.11

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Temuka Leader, Issue 1487, 1 April 1886, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
357

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Temuka Leader, Issue 1487, 1 April 1886, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Temuka Leader, Issue 1487, 1 April 1886, 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