ul p^^ l^ B this morning 2i„,» • c, -,-JF#& save-judgmentvJor the plaintiff, with costs, in 'the'following-'unde: fended. cases:--L, -,p ..Nathan, and Co. "W.i G: S. TJrUck (Helensville). £2' 18/2 \. tnro, Timber-Co., v. Edward. John "Samuel (Parenga), ,-£&, i 4/ 4 ;" L,- Austin,!' hud Sons v.JJpbert ,John Kalka (Ellerslle) -10/: T. Cooke, Ltd; v.' Kate Lewis <MerS 5 /*' *1 11/?;. John Bums and Co;V. It. Biggs (Hamilton), £4 3/8;. Ji S.v Gibbons y. W. A. Elsworth (Ngunguru). £38- Campbell,, Ehrenffled.and. Co. v. J.. Lund, jun (Devonport). '£15/; Waitemata Sawmill Co y. A. 11. Sulenta, £3; Fred Br'owhy 1 Harry •Prince Hooper. (Mitital). £1 15/; Richard Arthur and Co. v.", David'Andrew'Nairn (Parnell). £2 14/8; F. M.J Winstone : v/Ray Mlller : !(Pukekbhe), £3 2/6;' Cooke:arid Co. v.-E. Samuel (Parengarenga), "£S 4/;: W. F. Ford" v. Mrs.; McKenna, £1 11/8; W. A. ?Z2 nan s Co -' -> L * d --" v - Cour Marquis, '£9 .18/2; C. Short-and "Co. v. Mrs: Seager JE2 12/8; Direct Supply. Co. >. j; Bush (Paeroa), £8 0A1; WHUam Mathlesbn v. Robert Martin, £1 10/; Abdallah and Cordes v-"JAh Ellis.,(Glenmore), £1,17/6;. T. Strange, v. G. Andrews; £i 7/4;;Hehry f James Cobb v. James Flavell (Dargaviile); £10 16/; 'Hutchinson Bros. v. ■.-Edward'.iShort,: £13-6/4; -W. Lambourne • v. r Robert Wilson (Ponsonby); .£l'r4/»r J.'-H.-*-Baker and'Co: V. E. and W.-Morrell.(Glsborne); £6 12/; J. Bunting v. Joseph-Powell, s £27 6/T;*-A; B. J>onald v Thomas Moore (Ongarue); £17 10/5; Lamb and Smith-v. B: Aldred (Te Kiiitl),- £7,12/6; Abdallah 'arid ; Cordes .v. This! Lyons,;.£l 13/6; Abdallah and Cordes v: A Eketone (Sgaraawahia),, £4 8/6; ■Vaughan ! antf;:Purcell '-r. ': "J.'.Ellis -(Kingsland),- £2 9/6; Devonpor_t; Borough ...Council v. Caroline Tobias (Devonport),, £12«17/il; N.Z. Loan and Mercantile Agency Co. v. £7 .13/10.,'.. .Farm" - , Wages.—A. farm labourer hameS" .'Edward' Gibson . iued Thomas sheep farmers, of Orakei, fbr'£2* for ..wage's-due" tor 'the services ' of himself' and wife,' arid 1 wages In lieu of notice. The plaintiff and his wife were employed at £1 a week, and were dismissed without- notice. : It was. contended; for the defence that the'dismissal was justified-by. the t plnlntiff's;'conduct. : £1 was 'paid/into Court., Judgment was given for the amount paid Into Court. 1 ' with 6/- costs'.;- . ;'■• '-. Edward Chas; Kerkin. v; ..A, IL.Hobson; (Nortiieoto), £13 -fl/8. This defendant-wag sued jointly with another piH'ty, and in the other case judgment -was giveu:%;eon-.
Permanent link to this item
S.M. COURT., Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 84, 8 April 1909
S.M. COURT. Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 84, 8 April 1909
Using This Item
Fairfax Media is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. 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 Fairfax Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.