RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XX, Issue 3901, 18 April 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, April 17. , [Before R. Beetham, Esq., R.M.] DRUNKENNESS. Robert Baxter, for this offence, forfeited his bail of 20s. i TOPPING V. DOUGLAS. Claim of £11 Is 9d. Adjourned till L Ist May, at the request of plaintiff. ALLANACH V. WHITEMAN". Claim of £10 13s 6d, for goods supplied. , Mr Lascelles appeared for plaintiff ; there was no appearance of the defendant. • Judgment by defaxilt, with £2 14s 6d • costs. ROBERTSON V. KIRKPATRIOK. This was a suit to recover the sum of I 12s 6d for repairing a silver lever watch, i which plaintiff stated had been left with i him by defendant about June last, for the ■ purpose of having it repaired. One of Mr Ivirkpatrick's drivers had afterwards > called at Mr Robertson's shop and taken < the watch away, saying Kirkpatrick would i pay for it. 1 The defendant pleaded no liability. He ' said he had neither left the watch with plaintiff, nor got it back. Judgment was given for plaintiff, with costs 9s. MYHILL V. SATJNDERS. This was a claim for £8 5s 4d, portion of a debt which had been originally contracted by Mr Robbins, a baker, formerly in business in Napier. Defendant had afterwards joined Mr Robbins as partner in the business. The former had received the account and paid a portion of the debt. He had then paid Robbins out of the business, and admitted his liability for the money due to plaintiff. Saunders' estate was afterwards made over to trustees, and plaintiff was unable to recover the balance of the money owing to him. Mr Lascelles, for the defendant, contended that there shoxild have been some engagement in writing to show that Saunders was liable for his partner's debts. His Worship concurred in this view of the case, and the plantiff was nonsuited ; no costs. PATTINSON V. HEBDEN'. Claim for £1 12s 4d for goods supplied. Defendant did not appear. Judgment for the amount claimed -with. 9s costs. SAME V. MARY GOLDSMITH. Claim for 12s, balance of account for goods supplied. In reply to the Bench plaintiff stated that defendant was a servant at Mr Palmer's. Had applied to her for payment, and the reason she gave for not paying was that he had called too often for the money. Judgment for the amount claimed, with 9s costs. There was no other business before the. Court. _________ {