R.M. COURT

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume VII, Issue 2114, 7 October 1885, Page 2

R.M. COURT

CARTERTON.—TUESDAY,

(Before H. A. Stratford, R.M., and . W, Booth, J.P.) Petev Pearick v. Martin Ofsosky.-An adjourned assault case. Mr Beard for plaintiff, and Mr Bunny for defendant. Samuel Myer, who gave evidence at the previous sitting, was recalled, and in answer to Mr Bunny, stated that he saw the plaintiff at the house of the defendant after the alleged assault, offering to sell some working implements. He saw the plaintiff at his own house in company with the defendant, when he (the plaintiff) said that the defendant had put the devil into him, and asked him to take him away again, Mrs Ofsosky, wife of the defendant, stated that she saw the plaintiff and his sister at her house about 8 o'clock p.m. His siater brought some sewing with her, and the plaintiff saw her husband drinking beer with mustard it it. The plaintiff asked her husband for some, and he gave some.

_ln answer to Mr Beard she stated that night they (the plaintiff and his sister) both came together, which they do not often do. It was about 11 o'clock p.m. when they left to go to their homes. Dr Smith, in answer to Mr Bunny, said that he was called to see the plaintiff about the 21st August, when he appeared to be suffering from indigestion, for which he prescribed. He heard no more about it.

John Ofsosky stated that the defendant was his father. He remembered the occurrence of the 3rd August, and generally _ corroborated the evidenco of the previous witnesses.

Tlie case was dismissed, each party to pay his own costs, and the plaintiff to pay the extra cost for the attendance of Samuel Myer that day, The Court was adjourned for five minutes to enable the solicitors to confer respecting the offence alleged to have been committed by Ofsosky, who was charged with having sold beer to his neighbors, The case was dismissed without costs. 6. M. Gardner v. J. H, Grattan,— Judgment summons. In answer to Mr Beard the defendant stated that he had not been ablo to satisfy the claim since judgment was obtained.

To Mr Sandilands: He had no title to the land which he occupied. He was only there on sufferance. Mr Gardener was his obstacle to selling his interest in the property. At this sta»e Mr Beavd asked to have the case adjourned till next sitting on account of the unavoidable absence of two witnesses in the case-Granted, W. P. Allen v. H. Ackermar..—Claim Ll2 lGs (id. Judgment by default for amount, less L2 paid since service of summons. Costs 28s.

J. Armstrong v. E. L. Wakelin.—A claim for L3B Bs, being amount due for fines in not fulfilling an agreement. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff, Mr Beard for defendant. Judgment was given for L 33 Bs, with L 316 costs.

This concluded the business, and the Court rose,