SUPREME COURT.—NISI PRIUS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5556, 18 January 1879, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.—NISI PRIUS.

Friday, January 17. (Before His Honor tho Chief Justice and a special jury.) The Court re-opened at 10 o’clock. M'LEAN V. NICHOLSON. This case occupied the whole of tho day. Tho jury retired at 10.50, p.m. and at 11.20 brought in the following answers to the various issues:— 1. Did the plaintiff with intent to defraud forgo the signature of the defendant to the paper writing referred to in the first plea as therein alleged ?—No, 2. Was the close in the second cause of action in the declaration mentioned the close of the plaintiff at the time of the committing of the alleged grievance in the second cause of action mentioned I —No. 3. Did the defendant commit the alleged trespasses in the second cause of action in the declaration mentioned, or any of them, as therein alleged ?—No. 4. Was the dwelling-house in the third cause of action mentioned the dwelling-house of the plaintiff at the time of the committing of the alleged grievance in the said third cause of action mentioned ?—No. 6. Did the defendant commit the alleged trespasses in the third cause of action in the declaration mentioned, or any of them, as therein alleged ?—No. 6. Did the defendant assault and beat the plaintiff as in the fourth cause of action in the declaration mentioned ?—No. 7. Were the said assault and battery committed by the said defendant in defence of his property, as in the defendant’s pleas to the fourth cause of action alleged ?—Yes; and no force was used but what was necessary. 8. What damages, it any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover from the defendant in respect of the several causes of action in the declaration, or any of them ?—£2so on the first issue. There being no other causes for trial the Court was not further adjourned.