APPEAL COURT.
(By Telegraph—Press Association.]
Wellington, last night.
In the Appeal Court 'the ense King v. Clclnud is being heard. Defendant was indicted for perjury at Hokitika in March last. Judge Denniston held that there was insufficient- evidence to justify a conviction, and directed an acquittal, but at the request of the Crown Prosecutor the point was reserved for the Appeal Court without calling on the defence. It was now unanimously held that the evidence was insufficient, and tho acquittal was rightly directed. Argument is proceeding in Pollock v. the blank of New Zealand, |a Wellington case in which plaintiff brought an action for damages. The question at issue is whether tlie bank is entitled to pay a postdated cheque before the due date. Later.—ln the appeal caso ol Pollock v. Bank of New Zealand, plaintiff had given a post-dated cheque, and certain other cheques. Owing to tho Bank paying the post-dated cheque before its date, sufficient funds were not left to meet the other cheques given, and one of these was dishonored by the Bank. It is for dishonor of this cheque that damages are claimed in this action. Argument was concluded this afternoon, and the Court reversed its judgment. The Court then adjourned to Monday morning.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19010706.2.31
Bibliographic details
Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 150, 6 July 1901, Page 3
Word Count
208APPEAL COURT. Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 150, 6 July 1901, Page 3
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in