MAGISTRATE'S COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7038, 28 January 1910, Page 8

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THURSDAY, JANUARY 27. (Before Mr W. G. Eiddell, S.M.) MISCELLANEOUS CASES. Frank Docherty, chaTged with having used objectionable language when standing i outside the Lamb-ton quay police station, was fined 'los,' in default fourteen days' imprisonment. Catherine Docherty wias convicted on a charge of importuning, and waa sentenced to one month's imprisonment. Robert Matthewson, convicted of drunkenness, was fined 10s or forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Several first offenders were also dealt with. . .CIVIL CASES. (Before Mr W. G. Eiddell, S.M.) Judgment was entered for plaintiffs in the following cases: —Wm, Taylor v. Harry Mathews, £2 6s Bd,, costs 13s; "Wolli-ngtou Piano Co., Ltd. v. Thos. Yule, 17s, costs 6s; C. M. Banks, Ltd. v. John Whoeier, £6 lis Gd, costs £l 12s 6d; Commeiiciial Agency, Ltd. v. Edward R. Issell, £35 6s sd, oasts .£2 14s; Sargood, Son and Ewen, • Ltd. v. Robert F. Spensley, £1 Is 3d, costs 2s; Commercial Agency, Ltd., assignee, and J. . Booker, assignor, v. Louis Ber-ly-n, .£2B ISs 6d, costs £2 14s; Orlando W.m. Oldham v. Jas. Aitken, ,£ll 15s lid, costs £1 10s 6d; National Bank of N.Z., Ltd. v. Emma Aitken, £7 sb, costs £1 3s 6d; Gordon and Crotch Proprietary Ltd. v. Edwin G. Allsworth,. .£ll 17s 7d, costs £1 10s Gd; Palmer Engineering Co., Ltd. v. G. Heard, £3 4s Bd, costs 10s; A. Wells Newton v. Tatama te Whataupako, £H 8s Gd, costs 17s 6d; Agnes Mcßean v. Harold Heydon, £2 10s, costs 10s; ,7. W. Hoare and Co. v. Geo. Stanfer, £4, 4s 2d, costs 10s; Wm. Adams v. os. Lewis, £4, costs 10s; B. O'Neil v. Prank W'lkinson, .£5, costs £1 Gs 6d. JUDGMENT SUMMONS.

lii the judgment summons case John Young v. Jos. E. Amorotty, defendant was ordered to pay .£4 Is 6d on or before February 10th, in default seven days' imprisonment. Robert John Lamplugh was entered to pay the N.Z. , Express Co., Ltd. the sum of 16s 6d on or before February 10th, in default forty-eight hours' impnisonmexut. Joseph Stanton was ordered to pay. J. W. Smith £1 3s Id on or before February 10th, in default fourteen days' imprisonment. FranK" Wilkinson was ordered to pay Sfenh<V|re and Tabor £i 6s 6d on or before r"ebraary 10th, in default seven days' imprisonment. Geo. Fernandas was ordered to pay Graham and Casey .£3 13s 6d on or before February 10th, in default seven days' imprisonment. A. Almond was ordered to pay the Napier Trawling Co. vS6 6s 9d on or before February 10th, in default seven days* impriecfnment. W. H. Wiggins was ordered to pay the Cycle and Motor Supplies Co., Ltd. .£lB 15q lid by instalments' of 10s per week. CLAIM ON" A PE.OMISSOEY- NOTE. In the case of Charles Pratt v. Mrs Hannah McAllcy, Mr A. Dunn appeared for the plaintiff and Mr B. C. Levvey for tho defendant. Plaintiff's case was that he was a debt collector, and in xliat aaipacity acted for Dr Martin, who had aittondett • upon defendant's husband Plaintiff said that when he called upon defendant she said she had been so well treated by Dr, Martin that she was anxious to pay tlie bill, which amounted to J 520, and she gave ham a six months' bill for the amount. ■ This bill matursd but it' was dishonoured, and shortly afterwards the defendant's husband filed his schedule. Mr Dunn contended that every holder of a promissory note -was deemed to be a holder for value until the contrary was proved. The defence was that- there •■ was no.consideration for the promissory note, that tho defendant being a married woman was not liable. Ihrfendant, said the bill in question was given at the request of plaintiff on the assurance that no steps would be taken to collect, and with the knowledge of plaintiff that the defendant's husband was going to file his schedule. His Worship reserved his decision. HAKE v. KIBBLEWHITE. In this case Mr A. Dunn appeared for Frances Jane Hare, a widow, who sued William David Kibblewbite, of Levin, for £H 9s, claiming as mortgagee under a mortgage which had been released at the time of the,purchase ,of some seven, hundred odd acres near Levin. The action was for the amount stated, which had been' retained by Mr W. G. Somerville. It was held by his Worship that plaintiff must be nonsuited, as having released the mortgage she could not sue as a mortgagee; costs £2 2s.' Mr O. B. Morison appeared for the defendant.'