MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1058, 22 February 1911, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

.+- CIVIL BUSINESS. (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) FOR USE AND OCCUPATION. Reserved judgment was delivered in tho caso of Edward Whiteman, farmer, Mungaroa, v. Frederick Edwin Seed, sawmiller, Mungaroa, which had been heard at_ the Hutt last week. This was a claim for XII 55., in support of which the plaintiff alleged that he nllowed tho defendant to enter into occupation of a house on condition that tho defendant would erect two additional rooms, and the defendant agreed to do so. The latter, however, failed to erect the rooms, and plaintiff now claimed JEiO for tho uso and occupation of the house by defendant for a period of thrco years and four month?, lie further claimed £\ 55., this being the estimated cost of replacing two windows, alleged to havo been removed from tho" houso by the defendant. . Counsel for defendant had asked for a non-suit on tho ground that tho agreement was that the defendant -was to go rent frco ,on condition that ho built two rooms, and therefore an action for rent could not stand, x and plaintiff consequently had only n claim for damages for breach of ccutract. Tho magistrato did not hold with this view, and, after quoting authorities, decided that defendant, having failed to build the rooms, was liable for uso and occupation. The question (continued the magistrate) then was to fix a reasonabloamount to allow. Ho was prepared to allow 13s. 4d. a month as the value when the defendant entered. Judgment was accordingly given for the plaintiff for j£2G 13.". 4d., for use and occupation, and £1 ss. for replacing the windows, making in all £27 18s. 4d. and costs. Mr. Fair apnoared for plaintiff, and Mr. Putnam for defendant. ■ A BUSHFELLKG CONTRACT. Reserved decision was delivered in a case in which William Michael Cuneen, labourer, Upper Hntt, claimed .£4O from Donald Reid, sheepfarmer, Upper Hutt, as balanco alleged to bo owing for work done./ Plaintiff alleged that, on June 9, 1 1910, ho agreed with defendant' to fell 00 acres of-bush at £2 an acre, and, as the contract wns duly carried out, tho sum of .£l2O became due to him. There was also due £2 Us. wages at 9s. per day. Defendant had paid £S2 Us. on and plaintiff now sued for the balance.. Mr. Fair appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Jackson for tho defendant, who disputed tho claim and counterclaim.for JEIO Bs., as 12 months' rent of, a five-roomed cottage at Upper In giving judgment, the magistrate said: "Tho only question, involved in the claim is that of area. Plaintiff's surveyor estimates the area at "46$ acres, while defendant's Mirveyor estimated tho area at 40J acres. Tho difference arises from the'boundaries taken by each surveyor. In ray opinion the defendant's surveyor has been sufficiently liberal in his estimates. I am further led to this by tho fact that plaintiff's wages average between £\\ and i!l2 a month, deducting 'tho tinio ho was absent., Plaintiff received a high rate, and a sum of Us. in all, and i consider that ho has been well paid' for what he has done. To turn to the counterclaim—ln the absenco of an express lease or an agreement for a lease at a fixed rent, where the premises have been used or occupied by the tenant by the permission or sufferance of the landlord, the law will imply a contract or promise by the defendant to pay to the landlord a reasonable sum for such use and occupation. I consider that 4s. was a reasonable-rental." '■> ■, '■ '. Judgment was accordingly given for defendant on the claim, with costs, and for tho defendant also.on the counterclaim for jErlO Bs., -with costs. " NONSUITED. '! Frank Cameron,' builder, of Kilbirnie, sued ■ Mpncrieff and Young, ironmongers, OTolHrfgtoh; to recover the sum" of i 190,' of which .£l3O was a refund of monev paid under an order mads by plaintiff in favour of defendant, and given to ono of defendant's employees, named Hewitt, in r«spect of-Vhonsa built by plaintiff for Hewitt. The balnnce of tho claim was for special damages, which the plaintiff alleged ho bad suffered through tho money paid under tho order not being available for distribution- to his creditors. Mr. F. G. Bolton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. T. Young for the defendants. Evidence.mis.given by Dr. Shand as to .tho condition of tho health of the plaintiff at tho time at which ho gave tho order, ..and by plaintiff, .who. stated that. •Jβ; gayo the order.on- the- understanding that it would not be presented until he "covered from his indisposition." TO £ lal ?. t,ff wm nonsuited, the magistrate remarking that, on account of his previously dealing in orders, he must have heen aware that tho order in this case was payable on demand. ABOUT A MOTOR-CAR. (Before Mr. "IV. G. Iliclddl, S.M.)' Dunk.and Pringle, Ltd., motor and cycle, importers, Palmerston North assuoTw o, ll° f. C °« J L° ,Or 2 nd C S cle ' C" sued w. H. P Barber, dyer, Welline--11,, '2 '; C T° r 111 - e SUm of * 31 »«-. «Vncy by tho defendant to the bcott Motor and Cycle Co. Tho debt assigned to the plaintiffs and notice Reassignment was given'to the dewhf'aEd2^^"^-: and, that while in their possession it was; so negligently used that it was wi?i y A f?V defendant further alleged that, in connection with the repairs, rendered necessary by that ncXeut usage, ho had spent over .£2O, and Xt in[ addition, tho car depreciated about £100 in value. Defendant, thereforo claimed .to fet off the damage and cost of■; repairs against any claim by the assignees. ' "° • After hearing the evidence, the Jla»istrate mtimatca that ho .would give Us decision on Saturday next. . UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment by default was given for plaintiffs in tho following .undefended cases: :-Arthur Robert Barnes v. Abraham. Levy M'Duff, J® i &., costs £1 ss . Gd.;,Aaron Henry Rothonberg v. James Stephenson, £3 35., costs 10s • \ D Kennedy and Co., Ltd. v. Alfred Davics. .£5 ss. 4d., costs £2 Bs. 6d.; Henry North and Co. v. \crk and Son, jeiO 2s costi 155.; W. and G Turnbull and Co v Mary Elizabeth Bayler, .£lO 155.. costs £1 10s W.,; A. Wilson Hogg v. Thomas Hall, £1 10s., costs 55.; same v. May Sandman, £3 10s. Gd., costs 10s.; same v F. W. Mead, £2 12s. Gd., costs 11s. j W." and G. Turnbulland Co. v. A. R Black' £15 Us. 3d., costs JCI 10s. 6d.; New Zeal land Farmers', Co-oporatlvo Distributinc Co., Ltd. v. Peter M'Ardle, .£55 65.. costs £3 17s. Gd.; John Kirkcaldio v. Thomas Macauloy, £1 10s., costs 10s.; Kirkcaldio nnd Stains, Ltd. v. Mrs ij' Ilurton, .£3 2s. 9d., costs 10s.; Richard Treo Badham v. James Palmer," JI.I Is., costs 10s.; City Council v. Frederick Henry Meyer, JC2I 7s. Gd., costs, £1 3s. . JUDGMENT SUMMONS. No order was mado in tho judgment summons case of 11. J. Brandt: v. Laurence A. Jacobs, a claim for J!l7 3s. 9d.

POLICE CASES.

■DECEIVING STOLEN HATS; WOMAN ACCOSTED WEARING ONE. Jlnry Theresa Ilnrris pleaded not guilty to a charge of receiving two hats valued at 305., the property of -Mary Dell, knowing them to havn been stolon. The evidence for the prosecution was to the effect that, early in tho month, Mrs. Dell had arrived by train from Wangnnui and, included in the luggago which she entrusted to "a carrier, was a lint box containing several hats of a total value of about M. The hat box was lost off the carrier's van, and nothing was heard of the matter, until Sirs. Bell saw accused in tho street on Monday wearing ono of tho hats. Accused was then accosted, and detaiucd and subsequently nnother hat was fouud at her lodging?. In defence, nccufed stated that she had received the hats from a man, whop^

she kiiei\" by "sight - only, and she had never thought that they, wero stolen. The magistrate imposed n fine of 10s., in default seven dnjV imprisonment.

THEFT OF A RIFLE. Joseph Pereival Rcvoll, for whojn Mr. 11. F. O'Lcary anpoarcd, nleadcd guilty to n charge of theft of a rifle, valued nt .£3, the property of the New ' Zealand Government. Cliief-Detectivo Brobcrg stated that accused had joined a cadet corps, and the riflo was served out to him with other articles. It had been disposed of to a second-hand dealer for ss. Thoro were two previous convictions against accused. , Mr. O'Leary stated that accused was now in steady employment, and, if 'his Worship could see his way to punish the offence by a tine, accused was willing to refund the valuo of the rifle. A fino of 20s. was imnosed, and accused was ordered to pay £3', the value of the rifle, in default H days' imprisonment. OTHER CASES. Thomas Gordon, who admitted using obsceno lnnguago in a public street, was fined JE3, in default 21 days' imprisonment. Frances Martin pleaded guilty to charges of drunkenness and procuring liquor during tho currency of a prohibition order. For tho first offence she was convicted and discharged,' and for tho second she was fined -10s., with the . alternative of undergoing soven days' gaol. Iwo seamen off tho steamer Sussex .pleaded guilty to charges of drunkouncss, and were remanded for sentence until rjinrsdny, when tho Sussex is, duo in Wellington. Ono first-offending inebriate was fined ss„ with tho usuul alternative, a P, , ° ?'""■ iirs ' offenders wero convicted and discharged. APPLICATION FOIt REHEARING. An application for rehearing of the Black v. Glynn case was heard yesterday. At the original hearing, tho defendant, Hawtrcy Warren Glynn, was convicted of assault and fined 40s. Mr. A. Gray now appeared in support of the application ' for ' rehearing, the grounds of which were:—(l) That fresh material evidence was now forthcoming; and (2) that tho verdict 'was against c£e weight of evidence. Mr. H. F. jO'Lcary opposed. the apulicntion, and referred to the caso of Lane v. Carey (an assault, caso dealt with in July, 1909), in which thero was an application for rehearing on similar grounds. In that case the Magistrate decide'd that as the offence was an indictable cue, he had no jurisdiction, and must dismiss the application..... - Tho Magistrate reserved decision on (he point, '• " JUVENILE COURT. TWO LADS IN A BOOK STORE. Two. lads, aged twelve and thirteen years of age, wero before tho magistrate, charged with stealing postcards from a bookseller's shop in Newtown. If was stated that tho lads went into tho shop, and, finding on ono at tho counter, helped themselves. In going out they rang a tell-talo bell, which brought "tho bookseller on tho scene, and, seeing tho hasto with which they, left, ho pursued them, nnd- ascertained their names. Tho lads admitted'tho offence, and wero discharged with a caution. A lad of thirteen was charged with setting fire to gorso on tho Town Belt. It was stated that the fire had necessitated the firo brigade being called out, as adjoining property was in considerable danger. A conviction was recorded, and tho lad was discharged on condition that his father gave him fivo strokes of tho birch.'