R.M. COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2903, 21 February 1891, Page 2

R.M. COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Wbdnesdav. •-Before Canton •lacks-x i;..m. Tiio.UA:; 11 u.i. i. i;i:v> is AM) CJ>>. Tiii- v.m a. claim ior'.'lo !.'!< 71 'H.'ain.-t lii f! ix-milhtu' !: Ii 1: I.' 1 - 1 ':- :l !i'! C'. Th u is« was !i.! j ■:1111':■ i 1 l ■ i:ii last Court da\ when .Ml- t;.v.-!ii:n .i;.j .11>-■:I i ti.e I'i ii ■ • iff and Me 11 y f •! f- sj sn-'. 11-L-wi-'. ,] 11-.!;.:, i\v • - '.'i.'.'.". t!i (in- 'I'll iII ill t-jv.'lir I'i lie:' : : ! • ■if 11 1 '1111 claimed, with co-l-. I I • Mr ; : l11!c attended to ]■-..• :■■■■ j.>i j nt > behalf iif tin' df] Miii":)', ti I, >vi-. Wlltl'l v. Tai unci. ! Ji:l i:u L'-> KK I'" till! Val'le i'f Cattle. This Was i--,s- ] jonmed iioni 'a~t (..'"ill t, day. Air Crui;-!\ shank for 11! iiur;ij' and Mr tiresliam I' defendant. T!iu plain'iff was u..ii-sniU-d wit h cs's !.'! It's for d I oidau''. Vatics v. IjKwis and Co.—Mi- (ircslmi fir plaintiff moved for a reheatin on tin; following ground.-', I. Tim a t the hearii)2 of f,h<: said ease o Wednesday, -l.it January ISIII, Mi Wotshiu tin! U.M., tile Clerk of ilie Court till! plaintiff (Yates) till! plaintiff's solicit" (Crcshani), and tin; defendants, Join Wickett i'irid n 'inaii and Tom I!. Howap were whoiiy unaware that the .- ii' 1 clerl of the Court had inadvertently omitted t si«u tin: summons with which the de fendant. Henry Lewis had been servia and that as regards tlio said Heniy L'*wi the said summons was a nullity. 'J. Tha at such hearing; as aforesaid the fact o such omission was well known to the ai defendant Henry Lewis ami n!ii< Mi'icit a' Sir W. McGregor Kay. o. That the sail defendant, Henry Lewis, availed liimsel of such knowledge and purposely kep away from the said Court when the sail case of Yates v. Lewis and Co. wa e.dled on and heard, although th said defendant, Henry Lewis later oi durim; the same day appeared n the Court with his said solicitor and d'' fended another action in which one Tiioma Hill is plaintiii and ihc said firm of Lewi and Co. are defendants. .\fr Cruiekshanl for file defeiuiam, Henry Lewis oppose' the application. The K.M. decided t pant a rehearing as applied for by Mi C reshani. Kaiu. linos, v. A, H. Maimikh.—Mi (iresliam for plaint lit.-'. Jo !','iiieet f a jil.iimilfs ioi balance ot debt !i's. and co i.' Ills lid. I). Coi: J. Ohmshy,---Claim i'L' for : wo tub sold. This e.tse was partly he in and adj joi ned to next cant day (M -rah Is .Mr Cruickshank appeared for plaintiff am: Mi'(.ire.-ham for defendant. John" G.\i;i: v. TYivOiiKrtr.--M.alieiou-injury to propu'ty I>y pulliajf down a fenci at Te Puhia. Information dismissed, the Comt having no jurisdiction, ai th" title t. tha laud was involved, the land bei in the Kiiii; Country. WAII-.I Coi'STY C'>vNYU.. - Judgment was pfiveii against a numler of dcf.:ukine ratepayers with costs. Mr Walton attended and was >w. -rn in n Ju-ticouf the i'caco by Ca[>tniu iek*on. K.M.