Judicial Curtain

NZ Truth, Issue 1176, 14 June 1928, Page 7

Judicial Curtain

close by intimating that he did not really require to hear any more evidence. In view of the facts already stated, and because neither the respondent nor the co-i-espondent had deemed it advisable to put in an appearance, it might be that the jury would find mlsconduct had taken place, he said. Similarly, in a virtual admission of guilt, implied, it might be thought, by the fact that no defence or answer was filed that the claim for damages would not be ex;cessf>re if petitioner's story were true. It did not take the jury more than a few minutes to give their unqualified support to the petitioner's cause, holding that misconduct had been committed. t They awarded petitioner the full amount claimed as damages. His honor then granted a decree nisi to be moved' absolute in three months. Judgment was entered for the petitioner on the claim for damages against the co-respondent, ■vrho'' was also the subject of an order for costs on highest scale. . Petitioner was given custody of the two children. ? . \ So that's how th'e sun j^hone for Sunnex and the court put the Oh! into O'Dowd.