THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 12307, 23 September 1904, Page 4

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT.—IX CHAMBERS. (Refort? His Honor Mr Justice Williams.) Probate was gran toil in the estates of tho following deceased persons: Ho Isaac Hargimon (Mr 1). Stewart), re James Dunbar (Mr Callaway), re John M'Leay (Mr T. M. Macdonald), rc James Maxwell (Mr Bailey), rc Andrew M'Farlane (Mr Wilkinson), re Jana Abel Sutton (Miss Benjamin), re Carl Roll; (Mr Webb). Letters of administration were granted as follow : Re Matthew Hunt (Mr I’oppelwoll), rc Laura Susannah Dickson (Mr Ewing). Chapimui v. Corporation of Dunedin.— Motion to fix trial (Mr Sim). The trial was fixed for Monday, November 14. The eases of Fraser v. Corporation of Dunedin and Skey v. (ho same were also fixed for the .same date. MAGISTRATE’S COURT. (Rofore C. 0. Craimm, Esq., S.M.) The Ciaughcsy’s Freehold Gold Dredging Company, Limited (Mr James) v. William M'Lisky (of Greymouth).—Claim, £SO, for calls due on shares held in the company.— Judgment (or plaintiffs by- default, with costs (£2 14s). William John Harrison v. John Crawford.—Claim, £2 Bs, being one month’s rent of homo at Burnside. Mr Stephens appeared for the plaintiff, and Dir Hanlon for the defendant.—Mr Stephens said that the claim was based on tho fact that in the first place tho plaintiff let the house to defendant for twelve months, and that tho defendant left tho house before the term was up. Ho paid tho rent up to the end of July, 1904. and the cl Jim was therefore for rent for the month of August.—The plaintiff gave evidence that lie let the house to defendant for twelve months, but on the defendant representing that as a railway porter he. was liable to be shifted at aiiv time, ho (plaintiff) wrote him a letter stating that at the expiry of sis mouths, if defendant got a shift of more than five miles, he could leave on a month’s notice This document defendant did not answer’ and refused to put anything in writing.— Mr Hanlon, for the. defence, submitted that the arrangement had been that defendant would take the house for 12s a week. This constituted a weekly rental, and it was absurd to think that any railway porter, who did not know where or how soon he would he shifted, would make an arrange ment for a year’s lease.—After the defend" ant had given evidence, His Worship gave judgment for the defendant, with cods (£1 Is).