APPEAL COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 197, 9 May 1918, Page 7

APPEAL COURT

* SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF THE ROLL HOWARD HILL'S CASE The Appeal Court sat yesterday to dear appeals under the Legal Practitionuiu' Act. Oil tho boneh were the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout). Mr. Justice. Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, Mr. Justice Chapman, and Mr. Justice Sim. ■

The New Zealand Law Society applied some eight months ago to have William Howard Hill, a solicitor, struck oil , tho roll, and tho rule nisi was reserved, for the Court of Appeal, and thie'cnino on tor hearing yesterday morning. The application to strike Hill off tho roll was made udou tho following ground!*:— . (1) That on or about June 26, 1916, William Howard Hill rocoived from Harold Hamilton, for and on behalf of Harold Hamilton, Hope Ellen Hamilton, and I'enrl Eleanor Douglas, Hamilton, the sum of .£3OO with instructions and upou terms requiring him to pay tho sum to Walter Godfrey Mante'l. in reduction of the principal moneys then outstanding under a mortgngo from the enid Harold Hamilton to the soid Walter Godfrey Mantell, and that William Howard Hill, in breach of his duty, fraudulently omitted to pay tho said money or any part thereof to Walter Godfrey Mantell. and misappropriated tho same.

(2) That on or about December 21. 191 C, tho said William Howard Hill received from_ Alexander Lorimer Wilson the sum of J!59 35.. in satisfaction of a, judgment' obtained by Edwin H. S. Hamilton, for whom W. H. Hill was then acting as solicitor, and on terms requiring him to pay the amount to Edwin H. S. Hamilton, and did fraudulently misappropriate the same.

Mr. H. F. von Haast appeared for the Law Socioty, and Mr. H, F. O'Leary for the respondent Hill. Mr. O'Leary stated that when tho matter was before the Court prior to Christmas it was arranged that Hamilton, who was at the front, should bo eommunicat«l with, and an affidavit obtained from lurn. Hβ (Mr. O'Leary) communicated with Hamilton, »ud sent him a skeleton affidavit, and Mr. von Haast also communicated with him. A reply was sent to Mr. von Hnast's letter, but not to tho one sent by. him (Mr. O'Loary). In view of the nature of the reply sent to Mi , , von Haaet's letter,. senior counsel was consulted, and Hill instructed Mr. O'Leary to say that ho did not desire now to bo represented by counsel. Tho Court held that,' in'view of tho dovelouraent, Hill must be struck off tho roll, and un order w.ns made.accordingly, with thirty guineas costa.

MANAGING CLERK'S APPLICATION.

An interesting point as to the status of a, managing clerk was involved in the application of Charles Clivo Chalmers, for whom Mr. E. M. AJgie, of Auckland, appoared, to bo admitted a barrister of the Supremo Court, under section 5 of the Law Practitioners' Act, 1908, which provides that a managing clerk may be admitted as a barrister, on tho ground that he had booh, for at least five years continuously nest preceding tho date of the application, a managing clerk or partly in active practice as a solicitor, 'the applicant had bcun in practice as a solicitor in Auckland for six months, and 'more recently managing; clerk oj: the common law department of tho firm of Messrs. Buddlo, Richmond, and Buddie, «nd an aftidftvlt submitted by Mr. Eiehond stated that in the absonoo of tho principals Chalmers would have control except as regards tho drafting of ••onveyancos. 'i'i'.c- question was whether a manasi;i!f clerk; of a department in a lar([e ofiiss was a managing clerk within tho meaning of tho Aut. For the appellant, Mr. Algio contended that being tho managing clock of the common hw department of fi. ltit;e office was sufficient 'n.iialiJicntio!i to satisfy the requirement of tho Act, and ixtii'aa contonded that tho applicant v/«s in poi:it of fact managing clerk of the wlwlo office excopt tiiat ho was not. go named.

Mr. von Huast, for tho Law Society, Htiited that the'i'o was nothing against the applicant as rogards character or ability, but contended Hint; tho control of a branch of an office did not satisfy the provisions of tho statute. Decision was resorved. RULE NISI DISCHARGED. When tho case of Robert Daniel M'lvor. solicitor, of Kaikoura, was called yesterday afternoon, Hie Honour tho Chief Justice said that tho Law Society did not think that tho man had been guilty of dishonesty, only that he had muddled things through drinking, It was to be hoped that this would be a lesson to him, and that lie would in future abstain from liquor, othorwiso it was not unlikely that he would eventually -be struck off the roll. Mr. Justico Edwards said that lie was not a prohibitionist, but this was a case in which the man should take tho pledge. Mr. Mille, of Bleuheim, who appeared for M'lver, said he would communicate Their Honours' remarks to M'lver, and point out to him the necessity of abutaiuing from liquor. The rulo nisi was discharged with ,£lO 10s. costs- . Mr. H. F. von Haast appeared for the Law Society.