RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3487, 27 February 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY.

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq., 8.M.) CIVIL, SIDE. . Judgment foe Plaintiffs.

In the following cases judgment was given to plaintiff with costs. —Fleming r. Corston, claim 6s, rates and costs. J. Read v. E. McManus, claim £1 17s, goods supplied. 17s 9d had been paid into court, which Mr Miller for plaintiff agreed to accept. J. McCarthy t. W. Western, claim £3 ss, price of a suit of clothes, and costs 6s. C. J.. Farrar r. McGinn, claim £1 17s Bd, goods and costs 6s. - - Judgment Summons. bbassey v. peabcb. . Claim, £24 2i 6d. • Order made that defendant pay it ih a - month. E. TUBNEB V. MCINANY' Claim, £8 9s. Defendant did not appear. Plaintiff deposed that since--the order was obtained defendant had been working on the reclamation works and. gum* digging. He was not in a position to prove that he had received any, money. His Worship said he could not make an order on that evidencer^otrwouliT give plaintiff a month'a adjournment if he wished. . This was agreed to. , MCCOHMICK V. JACKSON. This was acclaim of £10 for damage done to plaintiff's crop by defendant's pips. Mr Miller for the plaintiff, stated the case. The plajntiff and his witnesses deposed that defendant's pigs partially destroyed a crop of potatoes, mangolds and maize. The damage was variously estimated at £8 and £10. Defendant and his" witnesses deposed that the damage done was trifling, andother people's pigs had also been in the plantation. ■ Judgment for plaintfff, £2, and costs. NEWMAN V. TUCK. Claim, £10, damages for breach of contract.

Mr Dodd appeared for plaintiff and Mr Brassey for defendant. The'defendant deposed that he had been employed by plaintiff to do some 28 chains of fencing and wattling on plaintiff's land at Totara Point. The agreement was that he was to be paid £1 for every £1 worth of work done. , He got one pay* ment of £2, and as Newman did 'not. pay him he asked for a promissory note for the amount of work done. Newman gave him a note for £8 10s. He had not done .any more work because Newman would not pay him, and wanted him to obtain work elsewhere.

1 The plaintiff deposed that defendant not having completed his contract he did , not feel justified in meeting the promissory note. He estimated the damage he had sustained by the non -completion of the contract at £10. He was willing to pay when the work was completed. Bobert. Easter gave evidence concerning the amount of work done. " , ' W. Billings deposed that it would cost about 6s per chain to complete the contract. The damage done to the edge and ditch was trifling. This concluded the case for the. plaintiff, and the Court adjourned till twSL o'clock, .

After th» adjournment— The defendant was re-called and deposed that Newman had not requested him to complete the contract. *"' Mrs Tuck gave evidence re the making of the agreement.

His Worship, after summing up, nonsuited the plaintiff, each party to pay their own cost 3. ■