Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

COURT NEWS

ALLEGED SLANDER. MATHESON v. SCHNEIDERMAN. (Per Press Association). WELLINGTON, May 11. The case in which lan Meikle John Matheson, clothing manufacturer, claimed £5OO damages for alleged slander from Henry Schneiderman, merchant, both of Wellington, was con tinned before Mr Justice MacGregor and a jury in the Supreme Court. Mr G. G. Watson and Mr Wilson appeared for plaintiff, and Mr H. F. O’Leary for the defendant.

Mr O’Leary, on behalf of defendant, contended that the alleged slander uttered was upon occasions of privilege, and that it was necessary fo- the plaintiff to prove malice, but there w; s no evidence of malice to go to a

Mr Watson submitted that the second and third groups of words were not privileged, though the first group was. He submitted that there was evidence of malice. His Honour reserved the question of 3 nonsuit. Evidence on behalf of Schneiderman was given by Joseph Benjamin, public accountant, who was engaged by Schneiderman to investigate accounts as between defendant and Matheson and Cawley. He investigated the stock sheets, and, as an accountant, he was unable to reconcile certain figures and items, and be referred them to Schneiderman, who called Matheson. As far as witness could recollect, Matheson gave a very vague reply. Witness said Matheson refused to hand over the keys of the office when requested by Schneiderman, who told Matheson that if he did not hand them over, it might be a matter for he police. . To Mr Watson: ‘ 1 It was apparen to him that the alterations on the stock sheets represented arithmetical or calculating mistakes. There was no suggestion of dishonesty made by de- ’ "Darid Niclfolson, cutting manager for defendatft. said that he had not been dismissed, as had been allegei . He had not been away from work f a dav. An item on the stock sheet, “Paris should have read UH v'lrds from Paris.” ' After evidence in relation to a. check on the stock sheets had been given by 'william O’Connor, an employee ot defendant, Mr O’Leary closed his ease, and counsel addressed the jury.

MATHESON WINS THE CASEPmRS AsSOcta tiou). WELLINGTON, May 12. In the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr Justice MacGregor, lan Men Ide John Matheson, manufacturer, ot Wellington, was awarded £5OO damag - from Henry Schneiderman, merchant. rIBO of Wellington, for slander. Hie jury were away a little over tw ' °Counsel for defendant mentioned the likelihood of an appeal being mads. negligent driving charge. (Per Press Association). . AUCKLAND, May 11. At the Supreme Court, John Elliott, charged with negligently driving a ear on December 25th, and thereby causing the. death of a Maori Pm Rangi, was found not guilty and d s charged. NOT GUILTY. WELLINGTON,. May 12. Erie Gordon Bfasey was yesterday found not guilty on a charge of o taininir £4. with intent to defraud, by means” of a valueless cheque. Accused was discharged.

A MAN’S MISREPRESENTATIONS.

HAMILTON, May 11. At the Ngarnnwahia police court, Horace J. Spalding, a middle-aged man, was fined £25, in default three months, for falsely representing himself ns a policeman. He went to the Trupiri Hotel, whence £2O was stolen on a recent night, and declared himself a member of the Hamilton police who had come to investigate the robbery. The hotel people were suspicious, and th°y summoned the Ngaruawahia police, who found Spalding at the dairy factory representing himself as a dairy expert. MeaAwhile, there is clue to the burglary.)

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GRA19290513.2.25

Bibliographic details

Grey River Argus, 13 May 1929, Page 5

Word Count
571

COURT NEWS Grey River Argus, 13 May 1929, Page 5

COURT NEWS Grey River Argus, 13 May 1929, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert