A NAPIER BARRISTER

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 11, 13 July 1931, Page 10

A NAPIER BARRISTER

LAW SOCIETY ACTION

LADY CLIENT'S MONEY

Allegations that he had failed to account to a lady client for the whole of an amount of £2835 received by Mm on her behalf in discharge of a mortgage, and that he had failed to hold his client's money exclusively for her in a trust account, were made against a Napier barrister and solicitor, Walter Hislop, in the' Court of Appeal this morning by the New Zealand Law Society. After hearing Mr. E. P. Hay, on behalf of the practitioner, the proceedings were adjourned until Friday morning to enable any additional information to bo placed before the Court. There were on the Bench the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), Mr. Justice Herdman, Mr. Justice Mac'Grcgor, and. Mr. Justice Kennedy. Mr. H. F. yon Haast, with Mr. A. Free, appeared for the Law Society. Affidavits showed that on 13th December the practitioner was paid £2835 in discharge of a, mortgage, and that on 19th February' he paid over to his client £2393. As to the amount outstanding, the practitioner said he had a sum of about £500 in a cash box in his office, which amount, together with cheques drawn out against the money, were destroyed by the earthquake on 3rd February. '■'NO DISHONEST MOTIVE." Mr. Hay said there was no doubt that prima facie the allegations of the Law Society were substantiated by the facts appearing on the affidavits, but he submitted that the circumstances disclosed an entire absence of dishonest motive or dishonesty of any kind, j Mr. Justice Herdman asked what prpof tihero was, that Hislop had the money that was outstanding. Mr. Hay said that was shown in the practitioner's affidavit and that of his lady clerk, Mr. Justice Herdman: <(An extraordinary thing to keep £500." The Chief Justice: f'Of other people's money." His Honour said it was Hislop's duty to pay £2800 to his client; instead of doing that lie had paid over £2393. Why did ho keep the rest and what justification was there for this action? Mr. Hay said that Hislop had the money in his office. The Chief Justice: "Ho had it in the bank. He banked the whole of the amount, and instead of paying his client £.2835, he only pays her £2393." Mr. yon Haast: "And nearly two months after ho had received the money." •, RECORDS LOST IN EARTHQUAKE. Mr. Hay said that Hislop had lost his records as a result'of tho earthquake, and it was submitted that some allowance must be made in view> of his harrowing experiences, after -which . a man's recollection would not be of the sumo quality as it would under normal conditions. Mr. Justice Kennedy said thut a statement by the lady clerk, appeared to be curious. The clerk said that at tho time the' earthquake happened Hislop was preparing for banking. It seemed an extraordinary circumstance that he had left his banking until a few minutes prior to the earthquake. Mr. Hay: ; "It is x an extraordinary coincidence, but these things happen in life, as your Honour knows." Mr. Justice Kennedy: "Not frequently." Mr. Hay: "No, not frequently, but neither does an earthquake like that in Hawkes Bay happen frequently, if I might be permitted to say so." Mr. Justice Herdman: "Has the deficiency been mado up, Mr. Hay?" Mr. Hay said it appeared that Hislop was completing the arrangements for the money when the Law Society threatened action, and .that apparently "scared off" the person from, whom he was getting it. However, Hislop stated that if given time he had every prospect of negotiating the necessary money, and because of that it was suggested proceedings might bo allowed to stand over in the meantime. Hislop was a man of between 45 and 50 years ctf age. Mr. Hay said he knew the practitioner in Auckland, and had always known him as a man of the highest reputation. So far as he was concerned, from a purely personal point of view, he would not hesitate to believe- that Hislop had the moneys in hand on 3rd February. Counsel urged that the Court could not lightly disregard the affidavit of tho clerk, and that the circumstances showed that he must have had moneys coming in between 17th December and 3rd February in the normal course of events. MORE INFORMATION. The Chief Justice said, it was suggested that if it was desired that the Court should take any particular view in the practitioner's favour, he ought to submit a good deal more information. Mr. Hay said that he had onliy been instructed at the end of last, week, and he had already written to the practitioner suggesting that more information should be supplied. Proceedings were adjourned until Friday morning.