CIVIL SIDE.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2935, 12 July 1878, Page 2

CIVIL SIDE.

Judgments foe Plaintiffs. In the following cases judgment was given for' the plaintiffs with costs :—McDowell v.. Wigmore—Claim, £14, board and lodging, and costs, £2 10s. M. Casey v. Twenty-third of June G.M. Co.- Claim, £13 15s 2d, goods and work done, and costs, £2 10s.? S. Young v. CTrquhart— Claim, £30, promissory note, and costs, £4 7s. Dalciel v. Akers-Claim, £2 19s lOd, balance of account, and costs, £2155., " . .' . . OBME V. CLABK. Claim, £4 9s Id, goods. ; This case had been adjourned from last Court day to allow the defendant to produce receipts showing that he had not dealt with Orme at the time Orme alleged he had. It transpired that Mr Orme had made a mistake about the year, and asked that the case be withdrawn. His Worship said he could not do that. Plaintiff would be nonsuited, costs, 10s. Judgment Summons.

SNODGBASS V. NiCHOLLS. Claim, £10 3ssil. ■ Mr Macdonald for plaintiff. — Nicholls, sworn, deposed—l am the person against w horn Snc igrftss obtained a judgment. I have no mon>-y, but expect to get some shortly. I expect to have some work and will pay out of my wages. Theland I live on is the Aroha, and my people and I say we own it, but the Grorerijment rlso have a claim on Jt. I have a share in the Waiharakeke block. I have paid my tailor and bootmaker since I incurred the liability. I needed to get clothes. The debt is for brpad. Order made that defendant pay £2 per month, iailmg any payment to undergo one month's imprisonment at Mount Edeu. HEWIN AND BROTHER V. A. MOOBE.

Claim, £116s. goods. Andrew Moore, sworn, deposed—l am the person against; whom Hewin and Brother obtained a judgment. I:have not paid it because I have hot beeri working. I live with my mother and sister." By Mr Clark (Hewin and Bro.'s manager)—l liave only had two or three days' work the last six weeks. # Joseph Clark, sworn, depos xl—l am in the employ of llewin and Brother. Since the defendant incurred the liability he has had plenty of money, and was working at the Moanatairi. ' JN o order made. « -,

OBME V. CLABK. Claim £3 8s 9d, goods. Mr Macdonald appeared for the de> fendant and said that the ? ction must fail, as at the time it was brought there was another action for the same cause pending. '' „, ■, Mr Orme said he had given Clark notice, that he had abandoned the former action. »«■•««• His Worship overruled Mr Macdonald's objection, but as Mr Macdonald said he had not looked into the merits of the case and was not prepared to go on, His Worship adjourned the case. BOBBETT V. WALMSLEY.

Claim, £11 2s Bd, goods. Mr Macdonald appeared for plaintiff. Mr Walmsley said that he disputed the price to be charged for the meat, and produced two bills, on one of which he was charged 3d per lb., on another 4d for the same mf at. He also disputed the weight. William Bobbett, sworn, deposed—l am a butcher. I have supplied Walmsley from time to time with the goods mentioned in the bill of particulars. I entered the goods in this day book. By defendant—You got the goods I hare entered. . . .'Defendant said he had no witnesses to call. „ . j l ii. His Worship said he woird deduct the difference in the two bills, and gave judgment for £9 14s 4d, with costs £2 10s. H. E. CAMPBBLL V. E. BINNEY. ,

Claim, £45 lls 2d,, services. ; Mr Macdonald* for plaintiff, and MrBrassey for defendant. - 1# - I Some discussion took place re junsdic- j tion. , T Edwin Binney, sworn, deposed—l am the defendant in this action. I owe Campbell money, but he owes me money also. His bill is wrong. I employed Campbell as my solici'or, and have paid him £20. He gives me credit for two £10 and other sums, That is my signaturetothe promissory note, and I paid £25 against the bill. Mr Campbell had a fit of impecuniosity, and I gave him an accommodation bilJ for £56, which was substituted for one for £40, as ho wanted some more money. He wanted the money for some private affair of his own—for Mrs Corstpn, I think. By Mr" Brassey—Campbell owes me the amount of the bill for £56. H. E. Campbell, sworn, deposed—l am a solicitor practising at the Thames. I was retained by Mr Binney to defend him in a case in the Supreme Court. I made representations about the funds, and asked

him for £30 for costs, agent, &&., irrespective of whatever other costs there might be. He gave me ,aa accommodation bill and wanted me to take £10. Subse* quently the bill was cancelled and another one for £56 was made on account of general costs. The bill was dishonoured, and sued for by the bank. I raised monsy on the bill for the expenses. He said he had destroyed the first bill, and I took his word. By Mr Brassey—l did not tell Binney I wanted the money for Mrs CornUn. (Witness was cross-examined as to the particulars of the transaction.) E. Birtuey, sworn, deposed—l did not promise to destroy the first bill. His Worship said he w«uld bavo to take the £20 as paid on account of the bill, an* rule tbat he had jurisdiction. His Worship then gave judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed—cos'i, £5 10g, Mr Brasaey to have the right to review the reasonableness of the charges. Court adjourned.