MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 229, 22 June 1920, Page 5

MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL

AMMON V..AMMON, AND BEIMY. . Argument upon a motion for a new trial in the oase of Ammon v. Ammon and Boilly was heard yesterday by the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Their Honours Mr. Justice Edwards and Mr. Justice Chapman. Charles Frederick Ammon recently took divorce proceedings againßt Daisy Geraldine Mary Ammon and William Keilly. A jury found respondent ana corespondent guilty of adultery, and awarded petitioner £250 damages.; The presiding Judge (Mr. Justioe i'dwardß) entered judgment accordingly, and granted a decree nisi. As at the hearing before Mr. Justice Edwards, the netitioner was yesterday represented by Mr. A. B. Sievwright. tlio respondent by Mr. P. W. Jaokaon. and the co-respondent by Mr. A, W. Blair.

In the notice of motion for a new trial it was alleged that counsel for petitioner led ovidonco which was objected to and whloh would have been inadmissible, but for an undertaking he gave; that ho failed to fulfil the undertaking (which had referenco to the calling of proof, other than that tendered-by petitioner himself, oE non-access between petitioner and respondent) ; that the evidence, . once admitted, must havo led the jury to an erroneous conclusion; that the presiding Judge did not in summing lit) refer to pome material part of the evidence adduced on behalf of respondent; that the verdict was obtained through unjustified references to certain entries in the register of tho People's Palace as forgeries; that the verdict of the jury was against the weight of evidence. Mr. Blair argued the matter on behalf of both respondent and co-respondent. Mr. Jackson very briefly supplemented Mr. Blair's submissions, and Mr. Sievwright replied. ' The Court reserved decision.