RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 235, 1 August 1872, Page 7

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before Vincent' Pyke, Esq., R.M.) Wednesday, 24th July.

Adams v. Trdoar.— This was a claim for £25 6s. damages, for breach of contract with respect to le*de of land. Mr. Copland for plaintiff; Mr. M'Ooy for defendant. Mr. M'Coy objected that the contract was in writing, and disclosed no consideration, and that the defect could not be supplied by parole evidence. After hearing parole evidence, it appeared that judgment had been reserved some months ago for a breach of the same contract ; but the objection had not been taken after hearing evidence, the Magistrate held that the agreement was the one referred to in the written document, and as no consideration was disclosed in it, judgment must go for defendant. HammiU v. Ross. — This was a claim for L 22. Part of the claim was admitted, and it was shewn by evidence that the plaintiff had been absent part of the time. The Magistrate gave judgment for plaintiff for Lls and oosts of (Jourt, with LJL Is professional fee. Mr. Mouat for plaintiff ; Mr. M'Coy for defendant. Treloar v. SJieath. — This was an action for trespass by defendant's sheep, on the 30ch June, and the 4th, llth'and 20th July. Claim L 5. The plaintiff admitted that defendant and he settled for the trespass on the 30th of June. The plaintiff produced a number of witnesses, but failed to prove any substantial damage. The Bench gave judgment for L 2 damages and coats.