DEBT AND CIVIL CASES AT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6887, 17 April 1929, Page 5

DEBT AND CIVIL CASES AT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

"WEEKLY SITTING. Mr. J. L. Stout S.M.. presided at the weekly sitting of the Magistrate’s Court, held yesterday. Judgment by default was entered for plaintiffs in the following cases:— Ramsay and Campbell Ltd. (Mr. Yortt) v. C. A. Allenby £22 2s 4d. costs £4 7s 6d; G. Steel (Mr. Grant) v. Mrs. I. K. Barker £5 9s, costs £l. 17s 4d; Daw 7 ber Motors (Mr. McGregor) v. G. L. Norton £ll 10s, costs £2 16s; Holbcn, Hubbarcf and Co. Ltd. (Mr. Cooper) v. J. Bovey £2 10s 9d, costs £1 *3s Gd; Dalgoty and Co. Ltd. (Air. Cooper) v. R. Symes £1 17s sd, costs 10s; S. J. Brookie (Air. Yortt) v. D. Monrad £2 6s 9d, costs £1 13s Gel; Palmerston North Borough Council (Air. Cooke) v. E. Alills £7 16s, costs £1 10s 6d; Palmerston North Borough Council v. A. Alillar £3 6s Id, costs £1 3s 6d; Palmerston North Borough Council v. J. Walton 17s 9d, costs £1; L. V. Rowe (Air. AlcGregor) v. R. Stevens £3 3s, costs £1 7s 6d; M. Saunders (Mr. Lanrcnson) v. 11. K. Saunders £65, costs £4 14s 6d; Fletcher Hall (Air. Gordon) v.- J. Garven £8 10s, costs £1 11s 6d; Wm. Alouldey (Air. Petersen) v. L. Lind £92 14s Gd, costs £5 6s Cd; Reid, and Gray Co. (Air. Cooper) v. H. Hodge £lO 9s 9d, costs £2 16s; C. W. Peach (Air. Yortt) v. George E. \Vilcock £6 6s, costs £1 14s Gd; E. C. White (Air. Cooper) v. S. Ponketh £7 Is, costs £1 133 Gd. Judgment Summonses. J. H. Gattsche was ordered to pay J. O’Brien (Mr. Oram) the sum of £l3 2s 9d forthwith in default 14 days’ imprisonment. . C.'W. Dowling (Mr. Oram) obtained an order against Z. A. Alorton for the payment of £ls 12s 3d forthwith, in default 14 days imprisonment. The warrant is to be suspended as long as defendant pays £2 a month off the account. . A Partnership Dispute. Claude Galpin, of Palmerston North, farmer, took action against Ernest William Smith, of Palmerston North, butcher, with whom he had carried on business in .co-partnership, for a determination by tho Magistrate as to whether or not a partnership existed and if it did, whether it was ever determined. Tho summons also asked that an account be taken of all transactions and dealings between the parties and that judgment be given for such sum as on the taking of accounts, shall be found to be due to plaintiff. Defendant counter claimed for fclw damages for assault. . In opening for Galpin, Air. Baldwin stilted that the object of his client s request was to enable him to recover £9O Is 3d paid in satisfaction of debts due by the partnership. Counsel stated that as the case hinged on whether the partnership was ever dissolved, it was for defendant to prove that it was. Mr. Ongley accordingly called his client, who told the Court how he entered into partnership with Galpin in a butchering business in George street. Witness was to'manage the business, while Galpin was to provide stock and do the buying. Relations became strained in June last and witness alleged that the partnership was dissolved by mutual agreement, Galpin taking over and carrying on the business. _ Plaintiff alleged that the partnership was never dissolved, Smith just walking out. After hearing the evidence, the Alagistrate reserved his- decision as to whether the partnership hod been dissolved. Evidence on the counterclaim and the balaneo of plaintiff s olaini was not heard. r Dismissed. Without Notice, £2B damages for dismissal without sufficient notice was tho a™ o ™. l olau0 ;' ed bv Isaac L. Ward, of Whakarongo, farmer, (Air. Ongley) from F. J. nard. of Palmerston North, retired storekeeper LAIr. Oram). There was an Additional claim for £1 19s 8d proportion of telephone rental paid in ad vance and 2s 6d for dog registration raid on behalf of defendant. 1 Plaintiff claimed that he was peremptorily dismissed from his position as farm” manager for defendant and held that he was entitled to a month s Il °Defendant denied that any arrangement existed and held that a week , wages, which had been accepted b> Ward in lieu of notice, was sufficient. His Worship reserved Ins decision, stating that it was possible that the amount accepted by Ward acted as waiver of whatever term he _ might hoTA existed as to notice of termination of tlie contract of service.