Solicitor and Clients.

Northland Age, Volume 27, Issue 42, 28 October 1927, Page 5

Solicitor and Clients.

Claim For Negligence

Also For Money.

Judgment In Each Case

Defendant Does Not Appear,

The unusual case of clients proceeding against Counsel was witnessed in the Kaitaia Magistrate’s Court last. Friday. This was when Mr J S K Maclennan was sued by Urlich and Yuretich (Mr F Miller) on a claim for £250, general and special damages for negligence and for faulty advice.

This case arose from an action brought against the plaintiffs some months ago by natives of Ahipara for seizing a milling plant on their property. The natives were successful. Notice of appeal was given by Mr Maclennan, but the case was not remsved to the Supreme Court. Urlich and Yuretich did not know until the bailiff arrived at their premises that they had to pay. Mr Miller said that had security for appeal been lodged, his clients would have been on perfectly safe ground. After hearing the evidence of J' Urlich. the Magistrate ga.ve judgment for the amount claimed.

Maude Posinkovich (Mr Reyiolds) claimed from Mr Maclennan £l5O. This was a case in which £2OO had been paid to defendant in behalf of plaintiff in respeet of an affiliation order. Defendant, it was stated, had given plaintiff £SO, and had retained the balance.. On being threatened with proceedings, he’ had promised to post a cheque, but it was not received.

Mr. Reynolds said defendant had been paid by plaintiff for his services as Counsel in the affiliation action. He went away promising to return in time for the nothing further had been heard ot him. His rooms were left open and there were some articles of value there. Mr. Reynolds asked for immediate execution in order that ihe bailiff's might take charge and close the rooms. After hearing evidence the Magistrate gave judgment tor the amount claimed.