AKAROA, WEDNESDAY, NOV. 5.
(Before T. A. B. Bailey, Esq., 8.M.)
ABSENCE FROM SCHOOL,
Jos. Giddens wag charged with failing to send his Bon to Duvauohelle school. Me Blank, truant officer, prosecuted. Defendant stated that it was through ill-health that the child did riot attend school.
The oase waa withdrawn
A similar case agaiosb R. ShadboU wns adjourned for hearing on Decem- -■ ber 10th.
In a judgment summons case T. E. rj Taylor and Co. (Mr Williams) v. Whatta Tupon for £18 8s 4d, the defendant was ordered to pay the amount forthwith, in default 24 days' imprisonment.
In tha caso A, Stewart (Mr Hunt) v. r J. W. Wilson (Mr Williams), judgment wai given for £9 15s 9d aud ooßts £2 7s.
In the case Austin and Co. v. B. Paurini, defendant dil not appear and an order was made foe £8 12s 6d, in default ten days' imprisonment. In the case W: Qlymn v. Geo. Irving, a olaim for JGI 17s 63, judgment was given foe plaintiff with costs.
A LEAKY ROOF.
Haylock and Newton (Mr Williams) v. Alice Laing (Mr Hunt), claim £26 2s 4d.
Mr Hunt said the amounts in dispute were £9 for tilea and £3 for labour.
Leonard Haylook deposed defendant would not allow plaintiff* to finish tiling the roof of her houße; She had ordered the tiles and instructed them to do the work. They did the work, and were going to put a down pipe which would have taken the atorra water away, Defendant then ordered them to take the tiles off and replace the iron. Mr Hunt said the defence was that, wishing to have the work done, big client relied on the builders being expert, The tiles were an absolute failure, as the roof was quite unfit for them, and they were removed and the iron roof put on again. She was willing to pay the £20 without costs. Alice Laing, sworn, said she told the builders to put the roof on, and recommended tiles. The roof was completed, but the rain leaked in. The roof was very flat, and it wae like a shower bath when it rained. To Mr Williams : Plaintiffs did not mention anything about a dowu-pipe or a barge board, Judgment was given for JB2O 23 4d and £2 Gd costs, and defendant was given the tiles valued at £9. grass-seeders' settlement.
W. Pool (Mr Williams) sued D. Langrope for £5 14s 6d. Defendant admitted owing 1 i 3 6d.
Plaintiff stated he lent defendant £5 at the end of grass seeding, Hβ bad approached defendant twice, and (he aacond time defendant had denied owing SB, D. Langrope said he bad never asked for the loan of £5. When they Equared up after grass-seeding they had £48 to devide. He remembered receiving 103 more than hig share. Judgment was given for plaintiff for £1 4s Gd and costs 163 Gd.
Permanent link to this item
S.M. COURT., Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume LXXI, Issue 4348, 7 November 1913
S.M. COURT. Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume LXXI, Issue 4348, 7 November 1913
Using This Item
Akaroa Mail Co is the copyright owner for the Akaroa Mail. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Akaroa Mail Co. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.