S. M. COURT.- YESTERDAY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXV, Issue 37, 12 February 1904, Page 2

S. M. COURT.- YESTERDAY.

(Before Mr H. W. Brabant. S.M.) Undefended Cases. —In the following undefended eases judgment was giv-en for the plaintiffs wiih costs:—Charles F. Kennett v. L. H. Wilson, £3 15/; A. Eustace v. Robert Cook, £1 3/; William Thomas Davies v. James Lang, £25 2/8; Wingate and Co. v. D. B. McDonald, £12 12/; Briecoe and Co. v. G. Tricklebank. £41 2AO; M. EL Jansen v. Allan Miller. £2G 7/7; John Buchanan v. Albert Morris. £16 18/4; City Council v. Mrs M. A. Miller. £3 11/3: Gilman and Co. v. J. M. G. Loughlin, £9 2/; William Colemnn v. E. Berryman, £12 12/: W. C. Dennes, Ltd-, v. Emily Birch, £2 10/: Robert Rew v. C. Patten, £2 10/; Henry R. Jackson v. William R. Locke, £11 2/6; Thomas S. Hill v. W. G. Parker, £2; J. Hodgson v. C. Martelli, £8 0/7; George Campbell v. G. Z. Quarrie, £9 16/2. Worried Fowls. —Helen Marks, for whom Mr Parr appeared, claimed £1 8/ from J. Blair (represented by Mr Elliot) for damages done to her poultry by the defendant's dog , . She stated that she kept fowls in a large backyard, and Mr Blair, a neighbour, had a dog which she saw worrying the fowls and carrying one away in its mouth. Wien tie caee had been partly heard, Mr Elliot intimated that his client offered £1 as damages and the costs, rti/i the plaintiff agreed to this. TiHIS DAY. (Before Mr H. W. Brabant, S.M.) A Tramway Collision. —In the ease Auckland Tramway Co. v. Cunningham, a claim and couniter claim arising out of a eilllslon between a tramoax and a waggon at Epsom, Mr Gregory (for the Tramway Co.) asked for a week's adjournment, stating that there was a possibility of a settlement being made. The case was accordingly adjourned. Judgment Summons. —In Australian Art Photo Co. v. Howard J. Thomas, defendant was ordered to pay £1 14/6 within 14 days, the alternative being seren days' Imprisonment.