Resident Magistrate's Court.

Marlborough Express, Volume V, Issue 218, 26 February 1870, Page 4

Resident Magistrate's Court.

——.. —^-...... . —.— BLENHEIM, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 21st. [Before S. L. Muller, Esq, R.M.] NELSON V. HEARS. This was a claim to recover £l9 for work done by plaintiff as a solicitor. Plaintiff conducted his own case, and defendant was represented by Mr. IT. Pitt, who admitted the charge with the exception of £4 10s. for preparing a certain abstract of title. Edmund Ecclos, law clerk to plaintiff, deposed that the item in question was for preparing an abstract of title, consisting of 9 sheets, and drawn for defendant at the instance of Mr. Pitt, his solicitor. The first transaction was on July-21, for a <; ference relative to certain property, and on the 22ud for again attending and conferring, Mr. Elide advertised the property for sale in the first instance as mortgagee, and on the 22nd a cheque was drawn for the amount of the mortgage money, ne am nuu recollect seeing the cheque, but believed it was afterwards destroyed, and the sale to Meara went off, and the agreement was done away with. On the 27th learnt for the first time that Mears had resolved to forego the sale. Did not recollect Mr. Pitt coming to their office. Mr. Nelson did not prepare a conveyance, nor has there been any of Blick to Mears. The property was sold as advertised to Mr. Atkinson, but Mears bought it before and paid for it. The transaction never was completed by Mears. Never sent the abstract to your office ; it is now in my possession, and I produce it. It was prepared on the 27th December, and has not been out of our hands since, noP is it of any use to defendant. By Mr. Nelson: Blick advertised the sale, and arranged -with the auctioneer. W. M. Nelson, solicitor, remembered the day spoken of. On the day in question he found the parties in his office, and saw a cheque of Mears’ in Blick’s possession. At the time the property referred to was advertised by Blick, who made all the arrangements for the sale. On the following day Mr. Pitt came in to get a conveyance and investigate the title; he requested to be allow--ed to peruse the deeds. Told him he had already received instructions to prepare the deeds, but was glad to find Mr. Pitt , was going to do so, as it would be more 'satisfactory ; offered to prepare an abstract for him, which he then ordered. This was prepared, but witness heard nothing more of it, except from Mr. Pitt that the sale was off, but got no instructions that it was off at all. Mr. Pitt thought the proper person to pay was Blick, for neglecting to inform last witness that the sale was off. 'Ordered the abstract, but two hours after went' and informed him that the sale was off. "! The abstract was never wanted, br'-sven delivered. He then called "' i '. Henry Mears, the defendant, wHotfeposed that about 21st July last he wentTA Blick respecting the purchase of Dr. house and land. A memorandum was.Stawn up, and he gave a cheque for £250, and was to take up the mortgage in the'Brlilding Society. They said they could not give a receipt till after the sale had taken place on Saturday. "Went straight to Mr. Pitt’s place to see if it was right, who said it was not. The agreement was not completed, and the receipt for the cheque was destroyed; Went to Mr. Nelson and told him, and also next day told Blick, who agreed to tear up

the cheque. Plaintiff said it would have been all right had I waited till after the sale on Saturday. Told plaintiff the sale was off on the same night. ]3y Mr. Nelson : Went direct to Mr. Pitt, who said Elide could not sell legally. I told you on the same day at the corner I would have nothing more to do with it; again, on the next day, told you the cheque was torn up. Mr. Pitt contended that the abstract ot tide should be at the expense of the vendor, in order to show that the title was clear; and stated that he went and imformed plaintiff himself that the sale was off. The Court agreed that such was the law of England, but deferred giving judgment until Monday next.