Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

ALLEGED WRONGFUL ARREST

[Peb United Press Association.) AUCKLAND, November 26. Tho Supreme Court was occupied yesterday and to-day with an action in which £2OO general damages and £3 Is special damages arc claimed for alleged wrongful arrest, brought by Alfred Cnthbert Story, medical practitioner, formerly of Rarotonga, against William Henry Grove, Island trader, Auckland. The allegation forming the basis of claim is that the defendant maliciously and without reasonabls excuse had the plaintiff arrested at Wellington on the ground that Dr Story was about to evade payment of £2O, which the defendant alleged "was owing by the doctor for a buggy imported from America to Rarotonga. Tho plaintiff's case was that h© had never seen the buggy; that ho ordered one on Mr Groves’s manager assuring him that he could have it within two months (that was in August, 1911); that as the huggv had not arrived in the middle of October the plaintiff told his wife to inform tho defendant’s manager at Rarotonga that he would not take it; that the buggy did not arrive till January, 1912; that from that date till October, 1912, the defendant threatened to take proceedings; that Story refused to take delivery of the buggy all this time; that no legal proceedings were taken, and that none w ere taken till Story was leaving Wellington for England as ship’s surgeon on the steamer Surrey; that he was then arrested and brought before the Court; that on an application for a second adjournment by defendant’s counsel drove was nonsuited. Dr Story was cross-examined at length, suggesting that lie had not discharged other debts, Mr Heed moved for a nonsuit on the grounds—-ll) that there was no evidence <f malice: (2) the absence of reasonable and probablo cause. Mr Justice Cooper reserved his decision on these points. The case for the defence was that the defendant had acted honestly in having plaintiff arrested ; that he considered he had a good cause for action; that he was never informed the doctor had repudiated the purchase on tho grounds that the buggy was not delivered within two months; that th« sole reason he knew for tho doctor failing to take delivery of the buggy was that ha was unable to pay for it, and that the sole reason for delay in taking action was want of necessary evidence, which was eventually obtained, the case is proceeding

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19141126.2.63

Bibliographic details

ALLEGED WRONGFUL ARREST, Evening Star, Issue 15660, 26 November 1914

Word Count
398

ALLEGED WRONGFUL ARREST Evening Star, Issue 15660, 26 November 1914

Working