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

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON—SATURDAY,

■ Judgment waq given in the case it. M. G&Htroy v. A. Phillips;: by S. p,-Bt\U'iner l K.MI this morning follows In tliis case'purges we partners;, in a - ;business, fea plaintiff advancing iZQfh oil aooouut of tjie partnership mid tlitf defendant the ut.eriails l aud toola of tho tnitfo" value about £BO, The defendant was to conduct the business ami to receive £1 per pd |a ; l(

. profits,' the'plaintiff lo 'receive He .balance,, This, had. tbe busines been ovcii moderately ■ bcfeessful, would have been an excellent 'investment -fa?■ tbe plaintiff. ; t During the partuor. shipj ll6fehdaiit, witli 'the ■' consent of .the. plaintiff,..obtained certain partnotpay -his", private debts. The business not provjug a' success, on the Ist,'August 1888, an agreement was enteredinlo-between 'the patties to close the partnership, and had the terms of thjs agreement .been earned out; the plaintiff would liave been reimbursed "iiTfull"tlf^'amount'paid by him iu'tp;tbe partnership} and the Court is satisfied that tiiis case would not have been brought into Court.-vjn tho agreemer%iere is jio ( of the defendant being lii'any way considered, ius;iar;as, thej ( value of his tools, etc., wero concerned. Now, wheuii partnership is entered into the partners, must.have thfilpes as well as tiie profits. lam or opinion that wheiiithis agreement to wind up tho partnership was signed, it was. intended to release the defendant from all fuctlier^jaiffls,'?iid l consider that the 1 plaintiff's prOpoi! course' would be to enforce the terms of the agreement. It will be observed also that the plaintiff' lite : sued : 'iii' : 'hfi'-'own name and not as a member of the late firm Phillips tCo; also that in the agreement of \lissolutitmdf\)artuership the defendant is the person authorised to collect' the.'debts dub to the late firm, and not the present plaintiff, Tho plaintiff is therefore nonsuited with" costs L2 2s solicitorsifee7T ■f; ; • DISTRICT COURT.

MASTERTON-FRIDAY.

' Before. Judge Davy.

. Mck y Cm (Cpntnmed). After evidence for the deface lmd heard the Jury retired 'and after being locked up for.an hour and a half, returned with a verdict for tiief plaintiff for the sum of £l2, balance of rent aud £8 claim for rolling acres of land.

The question of coatg was argued this -(Saturday). morning by Counsel, His Honor decided to hold oyer the question of costs.

In the case Ufficial Assignee -V Hull judgment wns'aiao held over. >.l This concluded the business of the Court,

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WDT18880825.2.11

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume IX, Issue 2986, 25 August 1888, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
394

R.M. COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume IX, Issue 2986, 25 August 1888, Page 2

R.M. COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume IX, Issue 2986, 25 August 1888, Page 2

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