LIBEL AND SLANDER.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 154, 15 June 1911, Page 3

LIBEL AND SLANDER.

TWO UNSUCCESSFUL ACTIONS.

[PEB PBESS ASSOCIATION.]

Nelson, June 14.

In the Supreme Court action, Richardson v. “Nelson Evening Mail,” a claim for £3OOO damages for libel, the jury returned a verdict for the defendants. Plaintiff’s counsel intimated his intention of moving to set the verdict aside.

The case of Effie E. Richardson, widow, v. C. J. Harley, solicitor,' claim £3OOO for alleged slander, arose under the same circumstances as the former action. Mrs. Richardson was the defendant in an action brought by the Waimea County Council in the S.M. Court for encroaching on a public road. Mr. Harley appeared for the council, and during the case the Crown grant of Mrs. Richardson’s property was put in containing a plan. Mr. Harley inspected the exhibit and macfe a remark to the effect that the plan had been altered since he had last seen it. The Registrar of Deeds at the Magistrate’s request, compared the grant with the copy in his possession, and pronounced that no alteration had been made. The Magistrate thereupon said the statement should be withdrawn, which, however, Mr. Harley did not do, and Mrs. Richardson proceeded for slander. Mr. Jellicoe appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Maginnity for the defendant. When the plaintiff’s case was closed Mr. Maginnity moved for a non-suit on the grounds that a solicitor was protected by privilege in statements made in the course of an action. After hearing lengthy argument. His Honour upheld the contention and non-suited the plaintiff with costs.