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

THE MACDONALD CASE

BEFORE THE APPEAL COURT.

ADJOURNED TILL TO-DAY

[By Tekwivh—L'xw Association.]

WELLINGTON, Last Night. In the cant? before the Appeal Court to-day, in which Thomas Kennedy Macdonald, M.L.C., is the apl pellant and Mary Rose and others rej spondents, the action arose out of the administration by appellant of the estates of Robert Greenfield, whose children the respondents are. I The statement of claim in the SuI preme Court showed thajb appellant was appointed executor and trustee under the will of Robert Greenfield, wuo died in 1893, and that he undertook the "pfrforraanoe and execution of the trust of tho will, and also of certain settlements which had been made. It was alleged I hat during the tima he actod as trustee the appellI a::t failed to render accounts of, his , administration, - though repeatedly j applied to by the respondents, arid ! they prayed tbafc the appellant might Ibe removed fi f om his-office as tnisjtee. An order was subsequently made by consent to have an account taken : and in December;'l9lo, an order was made for payment into Court of the sum of £3647"3s 3d, agreed to be due by the appellant. -1 ue next, step was a motion for leave to issue a writ of attachment against the appellant for' failing to comply with the order of payment. An order was duly made for the issue of a writ against appellant, who then moved; to set it aside. After further proceedings the case was removed to the Appeal Court to ascertain whether the Supreme Court had had jurisdiction to. make the order for the writ of attachment. Mr C. H. Threadwell appeared for the appellant, and Mr A. W. Blair for the respondents. , , > Mr Threadwell opened the proceedings by outlining the history of the case. He contended that the action for accounts \vas an action for debt, and therefore within the exceptions contained in Rule 392, and that consequently j>he Court had no jurisdiction to make a writ of attachment. The Court adjourned the hearing until 10.30 to-morrow.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19110405.2.21.8

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10205, 5 April 1911, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
340

THE MACDONALD CASE Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10205, 5 April 1911, Page 5

THE MACDONALD CASE Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10205, 5 April 1911, 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