SUPREME COURT

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 111, 13 May 1927, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

NEXT WEEK'S SESSIONS

DIVOECE AND CIVIL CASES,

The quarterly criminal, civil, and divorce sittings of the Supremo Court will commence at "Wellington on Tuesday. '' , m divorce. The following divorce suits havo teen sot down tor hoaring on tho grounds stated:— Before a Judge and Common Jury of „ Twelve. Thomas William Warner vv. Jean Mary Elizabeth Warner, allegod adultery. ..■■•■'. Before a Judgo Alone. Amelia Broris v. Ingvard Nielaon Brons, alleged desertion; Percy Proctor v. Annie Proctor, alleged desertion; ; Vincent Glcdhill v. Amy Amelia Gledy hill, alleged, adultery; Julie King v. Ed- • ward Henry v King, ulleged desertion; Walter George Bent v. Sibyl Frances Bent, alleged desertion; Ernest William James Cundy v. Ethol Cundy, alleged ndultory.; Robert Johnson v. Jane Anne Johnston, judicial separation, alleged cruelty; Ruby Marie Chapman v. Norman Boyle' Chapman, deed of separation; Murdoch Collio Henderson v. Vora Catherine Mary Henderson, alleged desertion ; Edward Frank Smith v. Marjorie Elsa Ellen Smith, alleged desertion; William George Shilling v. Annie Jane Shilling, deed of separation; Clarence Charles Campbell v. Doris Campbell, alleged adultery; Ivy Irene Beatrice Arney v. Herbert Alfred, Arney, alleged adultery; Alico Busbridge v. Peter Busbridge, alleged desertion; Benjamin Thomas Johnson v. Isobel Flora Johnson, restitution of cbnjugal rights; Alice Hilda Cousins v. John Daniel Cousins, separation; Claire Elizabeth Edwards v. Richard Alloyn Edwards, deed separation; Eleanor Courtenay v. Frederick Courtney, deed separation; Gladys Lilian Welbourno vi Henry Frederick Wolbpurno, deed separation; Joseph Thomas Coster v. Maud Francos Coster, alleged' desortion; Alexander Beatty- v. Nellie Beatty, alleged desertion; Eugene Riordan v. Eileen Ann Riordan, alleged desertion; Beatrice Louiso M'Donald v. John Edward M'Donald, alleged desertion; Muriel Emma Tattersail v. Henry" James Tattcrson, separation order; Charles Albert Ernest Purdey v. Phoebe Pjirdoy, 1 alleged desertion; ,Emme May Hoddorwiok v. John Edward !Hoddcrwick, separation; Edith Sarah Darragh v. Samuel Darragh, separation; Lily, May Raff el v. Thomas Raffol, alleged adultery; Edward William Playle. v. Nilla Playlo, alleged adultery; Elizabeth Boyd y. William Boyd, desertion; Richard Drivor v. A vary Aline, Driver, alleged; dosertion; Walter. Bamford '.. Hoare v. Mary Ann Hoaro, alleged adultery; John Kinloch Oaldor v. Catheriho Caldcr, separation; Edith Sheridan v. Marius Shoridau, separation; Citrlion Korr v. Harold Richardson Kerr, desertion; Alico O'Kanc v. Maurice o 'Kane,'desertion; Thomas Wishart v.. Janet Wisbart, alleged, doaortioa; Doris Maud Lawrence v. William John Lawrcnco, alleged desertion; Isabolla. Hasten Mawson V. Ralph Mawson, separation; Violet May Marker v. G'oorgc Raymond Marker, desertion; Edward Stace Hylton v.. Phyllis Janet • Hylton,■ mutual separation; Havelocjc Henry Reynolds v. Tholma Gordon Reynolds,, restitution of conjugal rights; Sybil Marion , Burt v. James Burt, mutual separation; Myra Jane Soarl v. Poreival Claude Searl, alleged adultory;. James iHyndman v. Lily Margaret Hyndman, deed separation; Rita May Hannig v. Paul Walter Hannig, alleged adultery; Locy Elizabeth Falconer V. James Albert' Falconer, mutual nopsrution; Gcorgo Fredorick Cogdale v. Ethel Cogdale, mutual senaratioih ■•■■•<'•' •'•■rt.--?■•■'-.• ?-"-;:■ - .- ■■ Ivy ■ Hollirigshcad ' Willis v.' David Browa HowHeri,' Mary Elizabeth Howden, Amy Niblett Webb, and Ada Lily Howdcn; £2000' damages for alloged negligence. ' ■ ■'■ , 6th, June.-—Louisa Williams v.' Florence Hullen; £1000 for alloged breach of agreement. Albert Ernest Arlidge v. Catherine Arlidge; declaration, etc.' 7th June.—Herbert Alfred Walktr v/ Joseph Suggitt; £155 balanco undor alleged agreement. Bth June.—Dominion Sccuritiei, Ltd., V. William: Duncan; £300 for shares. Willirfm Hughes Field and other* v. Robert William Smith; appointment of receiver,' etc. •••'.•■ 9th Juno.—The Public Trustee and others v. Robert D. Benjamin; specific performance, etc. • 10th June.'—Jane Gifford Laurcnson v, Wellington City Council; £825 for alleged negligence. 17th June.—Georgo Henry Eugene Hills v. W. B. Girling and Co., Ltd. (in liquidation);- £6610, balanco under - alleged' agreement. '. - cmi, oases. 20th May—Charles, Phillips v. The New Zealand Shipping Company, Ltd.; £350 damages for alleged. negligence 23rd May—David Simpson and Mabol Simpson v. Magnus Motors, Ltd.; £1065 damages for alleged negligence. 24th May—Zita Mahoncy v. Goring Coleridge Johnston; £3000 damages for alleged; breach ofngrcement. 25th May—lsabolla Henderson v. Wright, Stophenson, and Co., Ltd; £1500 damages for alloged negligence 26th May—Donald M'lnnes Bell v. Charles W. Mack; £1120 damages for alleged nogligoncc. . ■ 27th May—James Ellen Hewott and Alfred do Batho Brandon- v. Thomas Kenavin Collins-and Elsio Mary Collins; possession. Thomas Marr Timpany v. "Now, Zealand troduco Exporter" Nowspapor Company, Ltd.; £1000 for alleged Hbol. The Gulldford Timber Company, Ltd., v. Charles Honry Pym and Florence Pym; possession. , „ r 30th May—Annie Janot Buddlcom v. Joe Barnao; £501 damages for alleged Blander. ....-.'■ ■ i 31st May—William Glondinning v. Floronco Kate Willingham; £216 balaneo duo under ollegod agreement! counter-claim of £270 duo under alloccd •groomont. . Ist .Juno—Ada Frances Wallcor v. iinnn ? llhps an<l Andrew Phillips; |1000 damages for allegod slander. John T?i"°!S«« ? m'v- Gaseo Pr°ssed Bricks, ijtd.; £1250 damages for alloged noKliconce. , ' ° ° .n2 l n MJun<^ Thomas Alfre<l Olftughton and Mary Elizabeth Barnett Olauahton v. Charlotte Robecca Bates and John Honry Bates; £500 damages for alloged false representation. ■