SUPREME COURT

Evening Star, Issue 18035, 1 August 1922, Page 6

SUPREME COURT

CIVIL AND DIVORCE LIST. The following actions have so far been set. down for hearing at-the quarterly civil sittings of the Supremo Court, which will follow the criminal sessions, commencing to-morrow week: James Neil Mills and another v. Arthur John Shaw, claim for specific performance of an agreement.

John Wilkinson and another v. Dunedin City Corporation, claim £l5O damages for the destruction of fences on a property and’ for an injunction. Mary Smith v. Dunedin City Corporation, claim £36 os 6d special damages and £250 general damages for injuries received through the alleged negligence of a tramway mo toman. and conductor.

Ernest Frederick Schulze and others v. Smith and Smith, claim for statement of accounts and for sums totalling £4,525 for alleged breach of agreement.

Janies Samson and Co. v. Murdbdh M’Kay, claim £SOO commission. Miller Bros., Ltd., v. Robert Cunningham Miller, claim £lB5 11s lOd, calls due on shares. John O’Connell v. Maurice Joseph Purton, an appeal from the magistrate’s decision at Clyde. DIVORCE OASES. Tho following petitions in divorce will nilso come on for hearing:—•Mary Jane Clark v. Walter Clark, Agnes Maxwell M’Farlano v. Andrew Cowan M’Farlane, Albert Edward Kitto v. Irene Avcril Kitto and Samuel Kitto (co-respondent), Annie Parker Arthur v. William Vernon Arthur, Annie Mary Hamilton v. Albert Hamilton, David Andrew Young Jordan v. Helen Jordan and' James Page (co-respondent), Ctaherine Knox v. John Knox, Alice Victoria Peat v. Arthur Seddon Peat, Catherine Williams v. John Andrew Williams, John Highley v. Hannah High ley. Motions will be heard to maice decrees nisi absolute in the undermentioned pre-viously-heard 'petitions:—John Waddell Gray v. Mary Alice Gray, Neil Macdonald v. Margaret Cameron Macdonald; William Alexander Bathgate v. Ethel Florence Bathgate, Jane Elizabeth Cradock v. Ernest Cradock.