Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

EVIDENCE FOR DIVORCE

FEMALE INQUIRY AGENTS CLAIM FOR SERVICES AGAINST DOUBTING HUSBAND. INTERESTING COURT CASE. At the Magistrate’s Court, yesterday, before Mr i<. E. Hunt, S.M., Cecilia Jane Elliott, a married woman, and Elizabeth Braniff, also a married woman, both xiroceeded against Charles Ambrose McCarthy for the recovery of £25 10s, ais remuneration for inquiry work, performed by plaintiffs for McCarthy. Mr H. F. O’Leary appeared for both the plaintiffs, and Mr P. W. Jackson for the defendant. , Counsel for the defence stated that, about April of this year, defendant was having a grsat deal of domestic trouble. Believing his wife to be misconducting herself with another man, McCarthy had endeavoured to engage the services of several recognised inquiry agente for the purpose of obtaining grounds for a divorce, but he experienced considerable difficulty in finding ail agent who would undertake his case. Iti'had, therefore, been arranged that Elliott and Braniff should act as agents for him. No fixed terms of engagement or payment had been made, but there was an implied agreement between the parties. McCarthy had suggested giving them £IOO between them. There had also been an arrangement for Elliott to take over the management of McCarthy’s house at a wage of £2 10s per week, but when defendant’s domestic troubles had been settled, plaintiff had lost her billet. Cecilia Jean Elliott gave corroborative evidence, and outlined the course of the inquiries she had made. The only payments she had received from defendant amounted to £2 10s. The evidence collected by Elliott and Braniff had been used in divorce proceedings which had later been instituted by McCarthy. Mr Jackson submitted that there had Been no implied contract, and, if there had been, both women had been amply paid for their services by the various emus given tbem by defendant. After hearing the evidence, His Worship gave judgment for £7 10s and £2 Gg costs in both cases.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19220705.2.46

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11254, 5 July 1922, Page 4

Word Count
319

EVIDENCE FOR DIVORCE New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11254, 5 July 1922, Page 4

EVIDENCE FOR DIVORCE New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11254, 5 July 1922, Page 4