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
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
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, LAWRENCE.

(Before \Y. L. Simpson, Y.sq , R. 51.) Thursday, March 30.. Chalmers v. Speddinj — Mr. Goodayfor pLiinhff; Mr. M'Coy for defendant. This was a claim for £5 193. for expenses incurred by Chalmers in defending a case at the Resident Magistrate's Court in

Dunedin, attn'.t of M'Lean and Spedding, wacre tho cisj w.is d;smi-s?ed, as the Conrt had no juri.vlicfion.

Mr. M'Coy o intended thrit this action would not Ho, and thai plaintiil* thould he nonsniti d, on the following grounds : —1. Tint tho Re-udciit Ms v _;i-strate's Couvt had jurisdiction until exception v.-as taken to its jivisdiction by the present ]ilaintiff; 2. Hint no action Hes for wron'/fu'ly or even maliciously prosecuting <i civil action against another — Addison on Torts; 3rd eel., p. 599 -th> defendant's leueiiy is by co^ts : 3. That the action liro light is an implied contract for remiriention for '.tork a'ul services, and no such contract is implied by law when a defendant i 3i 3 summoned toamwer a just debt; 4. That ihe original action was in the name of M'Lean and Speeding, an'l not Sped.li'ig only ; 5. Plaintiff had not proved ov^i.i.il summons : G. That tho cause of action was an action commenced by Hie iss'ie of a writ o'L summons from the Uo&ident Magistrate's Court at Dnnodin. and thex^ofors it arose without the juii^diotion of tho Resident Magistrate sitting <;t Lawrence.

Mr. U'Hiday replied to the various points a* sninj length.

1 1 is Wi r.i'ii.) s iitl ho was not with ihe defendant on all the points raised ivy his CtmnsJ. Pome of tho points had not bjon r.dse.l before, and wore very ngenious. He would re.-erve judgment.

Mitchell v. Adams.- This was an action Voivjfht to reover ihe sum of ,510 for services rendered as gardener. Mr. CopImd for plaintiff ; tho defendant appealed personally. At, the su_;g?stiou of Mr. Copland, the defendant acrrood to pay the plaintiff the sum of £6 los. in full, and the case was marked as settled out of Court.

Monday, AritiL 3,

Hayes y. Tyson.— Claim, £8 145., for expenses inemved by plaintiff in visiting Dunedin on a judge's order to give evidence relative to defendant's bankruptcy. Mr. M'Coy appeare.l for plaintiff; and Mr. Stamper (of Du'icdln), with him Mr. Copland, for the defendant. The defendant pleided a set off of £42, not iiule 1 ted. and that the Court had no jurisdiction.

Mr. M'Coy un^ed thai the pleas of setoff .-Mid no', indebted were inconsistent.

After lis'ening to lengthy ar_ r umr>nts from the Icirncd gentlemen on both sides, Iris Worohip concurred in Mr. M 'Coy's view.

Mi-. M'Coy then pointed out that the sot-oil' was bad, and that the only plea which the d 'fend.int could avail himself of was Ihe juiisrliotion

On this poi'it Mr. Stamper and Mr. Conlaud riddicssed the Bench at length,

and called several witnesses

Air. M'Coy argued that the objection to the jurisdiction had not been sustained.

His Worship concurred, and gave judgment for the amount claimed, with costs.

Mr. Stamper then asked for leave to appeal.

?=lr. M'Coy objected, on the ground that as the amount was so small, even the winner of the appeal would be at greater expense than the amount was worth.

Hi-i Worship, after consideration, refuse;! permission to appeal.

ArbucJdc v. Patterson.— ■Claim, £23153. 7d. I\ T o appearance of defendant. Verd c1"c 1 " for amount, claimed, Aviih costs.

Medwin v. Moora. — Case adjourned to enable plaintiff to serve defendant with particulars of account.

Scnnr.v. WVkimmi. — No appearance of defondant. Verdict for amount claimed, with costs.

Cowap v. Nixon. — Claim, £9. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for amount, with cost 3. Mr. M'Coy for plainliC.

Wj:dnesday, April Cih.

(Before W.L. .Simpson. R.V., A. Stewart. ,T,P.

llonife IJ.iMnig', Fsq., J.P )

Tuson v. Hayes. — This was an action for perjury. The case was adjourned until Sain 1 day, for the production of origuai affidavits, a copy only being produced in iho Court. The whole case will be reported in oin* rex'-. Mr. M'Coy for defendant ; Mr. Stamper (from Dunedin^) and John Copland for plaintiff.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TT18710406.2.19.2

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 165, 6 April 1871, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
682

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 165, 6 April 1871, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 165, 6 April 1871, Page 5

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