RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.
Tuesday, July 6,
(Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) CIVIL CASES.
John Orr, trustee in Edwards’ Estate v. Corsbie. —Claim L2 ,9s. Mr. Corsbie wished the trustee to prove the debt, as he had never obtained the goods for which he was sued. The man who had received the articles held a receipt for the amount claimed, which he would put in. Mr. Orr said he had no wish to obtain from Mr. Corsbie what was not legitimate,
and if the defendant had written to him to inform him that the; account had been settled, there would have been no occasion for the matter to have come into Court. Mr. Corsbie explained that no account had been/rendered to him until he had received the summons. Case dismissed, with costs.
Grigg v. Luscombe. —In giving judgment in this case, his Worship disallowed the law points raised. He was of opinion the wheat had been threshed too soon, and sufficient care had not been exercised by the defendant. Judgment would be given for L 25 and costs L 7 2s.
John Orr, trustee in Edwards’ Estate, v. Aitken.—Claim 18s. Mr. Crisp, for. .the defence, stated that the case, could not go on, as the plaint stated that the plaintiff was “ John Orr, merchant,” whereas-there was no such person. It should have been “John Orr, of the firm of Orr and Co., merchants. Another objection was that x the description as trustee-in the estate of ... H. J. Edwards was not sufficient, but. it should have been stated that the plaintiff' was “ creditors’” trustee in the estate of H. J. Edwards.' His Worship stated, with regard to the first objection, that that could be amended, but there was some doubt as to the second .objection. Mr. Orr said that if Mr. Crisp were to persist in his objection, instead of hearing the case on its merits, he would apply to have the summons amended. If such objections were allowed, it would only be putting Mr. Aitken to more expense, as in any subsequent action he (Mr. Orr) should bring his legal adviser, . and hence the expense would be increased. He would apply to have the summons amended. Mr. Crisp argued that the second amendment could not be entertained, as the statute had given the exact words to be used in such an action. His Worship said that while :he thought the objection a technical and frivolous one, it nevertheless was according to the statute, and hence he would have to nonsuit the case. Mr! Crisp said that if; his Worship thought the objection he would elect to go. on with the -caae.' j The case was accordingly, gone on with.
John-Orr stated he was trustee in Edwards’ estate, and knew from the books that the goods had been supplied. ,
W. Aitken stated the work had been done for M‘lntyre, for whom he was working for 255. per week. When the work was done, he had told a man named Gordon, who was in the employ of; Edwards, that the work was done for M‘lntyre. I was a servant of MHntyre’s. By the Bench—l do not know how Edwards comes to. charge me. Ido not owe Edwards anything. By plaintiff— The plough is now at the Hinds. It belongs to Quigley ; he bought the plough fromM'lntyre. If M'lntyre was to swear the work was not for him, he would be swearing falsely. Judgment for defendant, with costs Ll-ls.-
Permanent link to this item
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 126, 15 July 1880
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 126, 15 July 1880
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.