THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 17617, 21 November 1922, Page 4

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT. IN CHAMBERS. A chamber sitting of the Supreme Court was held on Friday before his Honour Mr Justice Adams. The following cases were among those considered:— Daivid Matthew Shaw, deceased (Mr R. Hepburn). Motion for leave to carry on business granted, but business not to be carried on for more than twelve months without further notice. MoFarlane. and another v. Sellers (Mr B. A. Cuthbert). Change of name of ThornhiH granted. ' Price (Mr "W. J. Sim) v. Gregory (Mr G. A. Connal). Leave to defend* granted, and case set down for hearing on November 21st. John Burns and Co. (Mr Brown) v. Wilson and Best (Mr "W..J. Hunter). Summons for ep'ecial jury made. McLean (Mr R. Twyneham) v. McLean (Mr "W. J. Hunter). Maintenance reduced to £3 per week. Order for the payment out, of Court of the arrears of permanent maintenance and of the costs and expenses properly incurred by petitioner made.

Scott TOr Cuthbert) v. Scott (Mr R. Twyneham). Motion for order granting custody of children to petitioner made by consent. Iredale (Mr W. J. Sim) v. Iredale. Motion for leave to proceed with petition cranted. Robertson fMr Cuthbert) v. Robertson. Set down for heprinsr.

Burt (Mr Cuthbert) v. Burt (Mr Hunter). Summons for change or venue dismissed. Mcintosh (Mr Oitfc'bert'l v. Co~k (Mr TJpham). Summons to join Donald Mcintosh as defendant eranied. Statement of &>fenc<> to be fi'ed within 14 days of service of the order. Decrees absolute were printed se fallows: Kellnway 'Mr .T. R. Cunirgham} v. Kellaway (Mr R. A. Cuthbert), and £2 T>er week maintenance; Phillies (Mr J. H. TToham) v. Phillips; Bln.ke (Mr C. S. Thomas) r. BWte; Chawnan 'Mr R. Twyneham) v. Chapman; Reid 'Mr C. S. v. Reid. no order ns to the cufto-'v of the children; Norgate (Mr Thomas) v. Norgate.

MAGISTERIAL. MONDAY. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. A first offender who did not appear, was fined. 2Ss, in default 48 hours' imprisonment. CIVIL BUSINESS.

Judgment by default w given far plaintiff in each oi tho following cases:— Harris Bros. v. John Atkinson, £5 lea lOdi; Jack Buckling, Ltd: v. T. Lackner, £5 12s; The Bell Cycle and Motor Go. v. 11. Harris, £l6 3s sd; H. (x. Livingstone and 00. v. G. H. i Woods, £25; Au.sebrook and Co. v. 3S. Searlo, £65 tis 2d; J. VV. StTaohan v. it. A. Hay and C. E. Hay, £65-l&i; Moffat i and Robinson y. £. A. Bull, £3; John Burns and Co., Ltd. v. Robertson Bros., Ltd., £B6 ]6s 3d; Arthur C. Gray, Assign:© in tho ebSEto of tho late L. W. Scrimshaw v. Louisa KatJileen Leighton, £3 17a 9d; Tho Dominion General Commission and Enquiry Agency v. S. J. Beaven, "£2 15s- same v.' William E. Nowfield, £lO ss; N. Kiv£r v. E. Dcnch, £1 lis Gd; F: B. Kesteven v. H. G. Greiand, £3; A. J. White, Ltd. v. William Nixon, £4 19s 4d; A. Puynton v. T. Crump, £l2 10s 4d; Booth, Macaoa:d and Co., Ltd., v. J. P. Jones, £l2B 3s 6d; W. E. Martin v Benjamin Borry, £25 ss; B&rneu William lounger v. Erio H. Hendry, £8 10a; G. McClatchie and Co , Ltd., v. Ernest Albert Smith, £2 19s 9dj, St. G. Atkinson and Cb.i v. Thomas Crooks, £l7 15s lfld. John Patterson proceeded* against Joseph A. Murphy on" a judgment summons to recover £2O ss. The summons was dismissed, there being no proof of means. Kathleen Erickson was ordered to pay £2l Is Id to Beath *nd Co., Ltd., in default 28 days' imprisonment at PaparUa. Kdwardi Bennett was ordw-ed'to give up possession of * tenement to John Precce on or before November 11th. Judgment was given for plaintiff for £2 arrears of rent. CLAIM AGAINST MANAGER. , The Canterbury Orohardista' Co-operative Afsociation, Ltd. (Mr F. S. Wilding) claimed from James Longton (Mr A. F. Wright) £145 10s fld, with interest from July 31st to final judgment. ■ ■ Mr Wilding stated that Longton, had been a manager and! director of the company. Under his management losses bad been suffered by the company. Longton had purchased goods on his own account and paid for them with the company's money. A balance-sheet prepared on July 4th, 1921; had indicated that £469 16s. BcD .was missing owing to Longton's wrong pui Chases. At a'meet-ing-of directors, Longton was asked to resign from his directorship, but he still managed the business. Longton agreed to settle the account which was reduced to £147 19s-7d, as a.commission of 7i per o?nt.»waa allowed him. On this sum, a rebate of £G4 17s 7di. was made. Longton had paid £2OO. Tho remaining amount of £lßl 12s was the first claim. Apart Trom this olaim there was another one of £l9 10s 8d for Australian fruit purchased by Longton ■ on •• his own ■ aoco'jnt'. This was admitted bj Longton. In March, 1922, there was £202 0s 8d owing by Longton, but £55 lis 6d was owing defendant as salary. The amount owing the company was therefore £145 10s 9d, The main claims had not been dvsputeoVbv Longton until he was dismissed •in March, 1522. The account had been fixed in accordance with the settlement of the claim. In the alternative plaintiff claimed > £2OO damages for loss sustained through defendant's breach of duty. .■•■.■'•' Mr Wright said that-- the defendant would admit none of the {acts stated by the oppos-j in? counsel; There were two points to be decided, whether Longton was su?d for negligence .as manager • or. whether he■. was to be treated a« consignor. There was., a complicated set, of accounts. . ■._■/. Edgar' F. Stead, a director of the company, gave evidence of tho company's .position under the management of Loneton, and the l operations of the manager without the company's sanction. He also traced thi> course of ex-enta up to the dismissal gf Lon«r: ton. and the directors' meeting in July, 1921, with details of varioua transactions. ; . After hearing some more of the evidence the Magistrate adjourned • tho oase until Wednesday.

RANGIORA. (Before Mr Wyvern Wilson,, S.M.) a G.' F. Murfitt was convicted and fined 10s and' costs "is for allowing four horses towander. . .. , _ For being in possession of an unregistered rifle, Thomas Elkin . Elliott was convicted and ordered •to pay coats, the rifle to be confiscated. Judgment for plaintiff by default was given in the New Zealand Farmers' Co-op. Association v. J. W. Jackson, £39 lis lid, and costs £4 3s 6d. No orders were made in Bobert J. Borland v. W. D. Barrett, claim £l7 ,9s, and the New Zealand Farmers' Co-op. Association v. A. V. Quinn, claim, £l7 16s sd. The application of Walter D. Dawson, of Rangiora, for a land agent's license was granted. His Worship gave judgment in, the case, Ward and Co. v. Mrs Sarah Jane Melling, claim £2OO damages for breach of covenant in the lease of the Cust Hotel and attached farm. Hia Worship paid it was claimed that the defendant during the two years for which she held a lease from the plaintiff company did not comply with the covenant to keep the premises in prop;r repair, to cut the hedges, to grub the gorse, and keep the land Tinder cultivation in a proper husbandlike manner of cultivation. The plaintiff company set out its damages at £263 16s Sd, but in order to bring the case vithin the jurisdiction of thr» Court abandoned the excess oyer £2OO. The defendant admitted certain breaches of covenant, and paid into Court a sum of £B9 lis in saiiefaction of damages arising therefrom. He could find nothing to indicate that the plaintiff company had suffered any special damage or was likely to do so. AH it would have been -entitled, to bad no money been paid into Court would have been judgment for purely nominal damages for breach of contract. The defendant, by payin<* into Court, had,' however, admitted responsibility, but only for the items cf damage" specified in her notion of payment into Court, amounting in all to £B9 Us. The payment into Court was made on October 27th, 1922, and at that timo euch a payment was an absolute admission of liability. ' The Magistrates Court Amendment Act, 1922, which became law on October SSth, now provide that a defendant may pay money into Court, and at the same time enter a defence on the same cause of action. The plaintiff company was entitled to judgment for the amount paid into Court but having failed at the hearing to substantiate the principal cause of action sued on that relating.to the farrow or. twitch grass lands defendant -would be given hor costs totally £ll Bs. Mr *«•?. appeal to the plaintiff oonrxmv and Mr H. CD Tan Asch lor th* de'eiv'-T.t. *