REPAIRS TO WAGGON.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXXII, Issue 2805, 25 November 1931, Page 8

REPAIRS TO WAGGON.

FROM PATETONGA. MAGISTRATE NON-SUITS PLAINTIFF. A dispute between Joseph O'Connor, farmer, bf Patetonga, and A. W. Shears (Mr A. Needham), a farmer and blacksmith, of Kai’nere, and formerly of Springdale and Tahuna, regarding the workmanship of repairs to a farm waggon was responsible for a civil action in the Morrinsville Magistrate’s Court on Thursday last, before Mr Wyvern Wilson S.M. O’Connor sued Shears for £5 damages on the ground that the work would have to be done again, and also of loss while the waggon was under repair. The turntable, kingbolt and adjoining parts of the waggon were stored in the Courthouse yard, but were not inspected by the Magistrate. Lengthy and detailed evidence was given by plaintiff to the effect that the kingbolt of the waggon was weak, so he sent it to Shears for repairs. When the waggon was returned he found that Shears had made alterations to the frame-work. Witness considered that this work was faulty. He refused to pay Shears’ bill, with the result that he had received a summons. Before court day his son saw a solicitor and paid £2 2s, which was paid into court in settlement of the claim.

“I have never had any traffic with lawyers in my life, and I never want (o have any more,” declared plaintiff, when explaining that he was somewhat ignorant of court procedure. He explained that he brought the action against Shears to vindicate his own character, because the issue of a summons against him had created a bad impression in Patetonga. He wanted to show up Shears. The Magistrate: This is what I term a very unfortunate affair. This should be a lesson to both that for small amounts they should never go to court. O’Connor thought his bill was too great, and so both went to lawyers. Now O’Connor is suing Shears for £5, because he thought that this action would give him an opportunity of coming to Court and what he thought about Shears. Well, he has had that opportunity to-day. O'Connor's claim against Shears for alleged faulty work could not succeed, because the lorry had been used after it was repaired, and O’Connor had paid £2 2s into court as being what he thought the work was worth. Plaintiff was non-suited, aid defendant was allowed 15s costs and solicitor's fee, £1 Is. Plaintiff was also non-suited, in a further case against McGregor and McPherson, whom he alleged had paid £2 2s into court without his authority. The Magistrate held that plaintiff could only take action against his son, who had paid the money to the solicitors without the father's authority.