PLAINTIFF NONSUITED

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 50, Issue 151, 8 April 1930, Page 6

PLAINTIFF NONSUITED

I TREATMENT OF A HORSE. At the Geraldine Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr C. R. Orr Walker, S.M., E. M. Redman, of Four Peaks, a married woman (Mr J. Emslie) proceeded against Charles C. Judge, Ashburton, stock-dealer, for £5 ; alleged to be owing on materials furnished and services rendered, bv> the plaintiff, for the defendant, at the request of his agent, J. Skinner, in respect to the treatment of a mare suffering from milk fever subsequent to foaling, the mare being the property of defendant and left by him in the care of Skinner.

Judge was not represented by a solicitor.

Mr Emslie said that defendant had a very valuable mare, which he left with Skinner until after foaling. After the mare had foaled, plaintiff had seen that the foal was dying and had drawn Skinner’s attention. Skinner suggested getting; in touch with Judge, bvil plaintiff was unable to locate him. Plaintiff had done all possible for the mare and! the foal, and had saved the mare’s life. The foal died, however, Judge had promised to pay plaintiff for her work, but had not done so. Skinner had said all along that the mare belonged to defendant Judge. She had attended the mare for a week, up till midnight. Defendant offered her the foal in payment, but she had l said it was dying. Defendant said he had not purchased the horse. It had been purchased by his firm. Judge and Cornish. Plaintiff said she had sent two accounts to defendant, and had asked him personally for the money. Defendant: “You thanked me for the foal.” Plaintiff : “I did not. It was dying.” To Mr Emslie, plaintiff said that Skinner had always led her to believe that defendant would compensate her. . Defendant stated that the mare had been purchased from Skinner by his firm as a maiden;. It was found to be in foal, and Skinner agreed to graze it until foaling as compensation. Skinner, however, would take no responsibility in the event of the death of the mare at foaling. Defendant had suggested to Skinner that plaintiff be given the foal, and this plaintiff had readily agreed to. The only reference he had had from .plaintiff in regard to the present claim was a letter demanding £5. When he spoke of this she said: “I suppose I was angry or I would not have sent it.”

To Air Emslie. defendant admitted the mare would probably have died if plaintiff had not cared for it. He had not promised plaintiff any money. The Alagistrate -said that if a person did work without the authority of the owner, then that person could not make a claim. To his mind the position, as far as plaintiff was concerned, hinged on Skinner, and not on defendant. Plaintiff was the agent and servant of Skinner. The law required that a person must be engaged directly or indirectly. The foal had been given to plaintiff for what it was worth, and it would have been a win for plaintiff if it had lived. However, he sympathised with plaintiff, and l if it were in his power lie would invoke the equity and good conscience clause in the Act, and give plaintiff something. Unless lie could see there was overwhelming evidence in favour of plaintiff, regarding this clause, lie could do nothing else but non-suit her.