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

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY

Before Thomas Beckham, Esq, Resident

Magistrate.

: The usual weekly sitting of this Court, for the recovery of small debts, was held to-day. UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgments for plaintiffs were given in the following cases :— Isaac Phillips v Thomas Taylor—claim £2 18s Bd, goods;W J Cawkwell v Lawrence Robertson —claim £1 3s, goods delivered; W C Wilson v the Brighton Goldmining Company—claim £4 16s, goods; Edwin B Dixon v Henry Saloschin—claim £3 4s 2d„ goods. HENRY DAFFY V R HILL. Claim, £2 5s lid, judgment summons. Defendant ordered to be imprisoned for one month. THOMAS WILSON V JOHN WILSON. Claim £2 8s 6d, judgment summons. Mr Myers for the plaintiff. Warrants ordered to issue for defendant's arrest, ISAAC WENDELL V SAMUEL DAVIES. Claim, £2 14s, sold and delivered. Mr Thome appeared for the plaintiff. Case withdrawn on the defendant's promising to pay £1 into Court at once, and 10s per week to the plaintiff's solicitor. Defended Cases. meyee3 v. gillibeand. Claim £4 4s 4d. Mr Meyers for the plaintiff ; Mr Kissling for defendant. This was a case in which the plaintiff sought to recover the above amount from the defendant for goods alleged to be sold to him on the Bth September, 1871. The defence was that the goods had never been ordered. Several witnesses were called on both sides. The plaintiff was nonsuited. EICHABD AETHUE V. GEOEGE SMITH. Claim £10. This was an action •in which the plaintiff sued to recover the above amount for goods supplied to the defendant and shipped to Coromandel on his account. The defence set up was that the goods had never come to hand. Judgment deferred until next Court day. WM. MAESHALL V. MICHAEL BUBKE. The plaintiff in this case sued to recover £1 lis for a shirt and pair of trousers sold to defendant. The plaintiff could not prove his case, it was therefore dismissed.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18720823.2.16

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume III, Issue 811, 23 August 1872, Page 2

Word Count
316

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT Auckland Star, Volume III, Issue 811, 23 August 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT Auckland Star, Volume III, Issue 811, 23 August 1872, 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