SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 99, 27 April 1888, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

In Chambers

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Gillies ) Pbobate was granted in re the wills of William Munro, Sarah Moore. William Johnstono, Geo. Rcvell, Henry Chamberlain, John Tostivan, and John Boufray. Administration.— Letters of administration were granted re William Barker (deceased) on the motion of Mr Campbell. Order to Register.—Dr. McArthur moved for an order to rogistor protmto copy of will re Thomas Readßloomiield, deceased.—Granted. WRIT OF PROHIBITION. William McGregor Hay v. Thomas Jackson and Robert Barstow.—Motion for summons for a writ of prohibition. —On the application of Mr Cooper, this was allowed to stand over till His Honor's return from the Court of Appeal. Public Trustee v. Eliza Warmoll.—Mr Brookfleld moved for an order extending the effect of the charging order and a direction to the Sheriff of the Court to proceed with the sale Of the land affected by the said charging order. Mr Brookfleld stated that Mrs Warmoll had informed the Public Trustee that sho had no property whatover, and that certain property at Takapuna registered in her name, was a trust estate held for her children. In giving her list of creditors sho omitted the Public Trustee altogether. -- Mr Thco. Cooper, who appeared , for Mrs Warmoll. said this was quite an , omission and was the result of a clerical error.—Mr Brookflold contended that if Mrs Warmoll had speculated with the trust property, the trust property was liable for the trust debt, and that the public trustee had a right to rank as an ordinary creditor. Mrs Warmoll was merely endeavouring to get behind His Honor's decision of the other day.—Mr Cooper contended that whatever right Mrs Warmoll had in the property was vested in the Official Assignee. The real question was whether Mrs Warmoll had any right to ffie, and prima facie she had, then all right was vested in the Official Assignee.—His Honor 6aid ho did not see that it would affect the position in any way to extend the charging order for a month, and granted an extension of the order for two months without prejudice to the interests of the Assignee. Rhodes v. Kerr.—Mr Hesketh moved for summons to show cause why proceedings should not be stayed upon payment of the amount of judgment and costs into Court pending the decision of the Court upon an appeal to be brought heroin, or why the plaintiff should not, on payment of the said amount, give surety to defendant for payment in the event of the judgment of the Court being reversed by the Court of Appeal.— Mr Theo. Cooper appeared in opposition to the motion, and said that ho did so on the same grounds brought before His Honor on Friday last. He submitted that there were no sultlcient reasons to anticipate that the Court of Appeal would reverse His Honor's decision, and that there was no sufficient reason for the stay of proceedings.— Mr Hesketh submitted that this morning he was able to pay over the money into Court, and in this respect ho was in a different position to that in which he was last Friday.—His Honor said this was not merely a question of securing the plaintiff, but actually a recovery of money paid. He did not think the plaintiff Bhould be kept out of his money any longer tban was necessary, and dismissed the application. Perry v. Adams.—Mr Coleman moved for summons to show cause why the accounts and . enquiries herein should not be proceeded with, taken and made by the Registrar of the Court.— His Honor directed that accounts should be rendered by both parties on or before 25th May; other directions as prayed. Order ab to Sale. —In James Fenton v. John Home and John Wilson, executors and administrators of the will of Robert Graham, deceased, motion for summons for order as to the sale of the real and personal estate of t Robert Graham, under. the decree made in . Chambers on July 9th, 1887. —Mr Earle ' appeared for the defendant and in support of ' the summons, and Mr Theo. Cooper for the , plaintiff.—Mr Earl stated that the only thing > that had been agreed nponwasas to what adver-. tiscnientshould.be published. It was proposed 'to have one sale at the Thames on the _6rA May,and another sale of the Lake house And Walreka

nronerty at Auckland on a date to be fixed by His Honor, and this latter sale wou.dalso include tho Ellerslie and Albertland property,—His Honor thought this course advisable, as the properties were large, and money was rather scarce in the colony just now. He fixed the date of sale for Aug. Ist," and directed that the same should be advertised in the Sydney, Melbourne, and New Zealand papers. — The defendants would have the conduct of the sale, a., executors and administrators of the estate.