RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'B COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9390, 1 April 1892, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'B COURT.

AA rEDNESDAY, MARCH 30. '■ (Before Mr E. H. Carew, R.M.) Judgment was given for the plaintiffs, with ! W 'TT n the ioll™m S undefendid cases :-Her fcSl Paynes, and Co., v. R. M. Smith, claim LU 6s sd, for goods supplied; Louis Beisse (for whom ' m ? an c natyne appeared) v. George Beath, claiS ti ,Ta S n VICe- re, ndered and a pipe supplied. Pl^ T? 1 Uno niUli ial? v" James Washer, jun.Claim -Lli 8s 6d, .for money lent.-Mr Sim appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Hanlon for the defendant.-From the evidence given by the defSn + 4ai-t it appeared that he agreed to allow the plaintiff to build a small house Su his land and to supply him with food, and the plaintiff was to work about the garden. The hSuse ™s built! A-i Z h°t J he, blL ls came iQ for "ie timber, &c defendant took them to plaintiff, who gave him the money to pay them with. Plaintiff afterwards left the house, and wanted defendant to i-1?. i? ? V a{? v 9 18 money he tad S"t from him, but he refused to do so, as he had not borrowed the money, but had simply got it to pay plaintiff's accounts. Defendant had no use for the house S™ quite willing that plaintiff should take vl o ?&V Mr Carew sl'SS*-sted that the case might be settled on an equitable basis by the plaintiff getting permission from the defendant to remove the house-Mr Hanlon said his client would at once give written permission for the removal of the house if judgment were entered up for the defendant, in order to show that defendant had not borrowed the money. Defendant did not ask toi costs-Mr Sim having agreed to the adoption of this course, judgment was given for the defendant, without costs. James AVilson y. Job Coulam— Claim L5 Os 3d for beer supphed.-The defendant (who did not appear) haymg paid Ll since the issue of the summons, judgment was given for L_os3d and Thursday, March 31. (Before Messrs H. North and P. C. Neill J P's ) • JS. ds?l? t ™as g»ven by default for the plaintiffs mthe following cases :- Reid and GravY Peter Harrington (Blacks), claim L8 9s 9d, on a p'romis!°!J. r not?- and fo£ s°Jl ds ,su PpHed; J. Hendry and _^,™r •_- GA°r rgJ-WBeat..h' claim L37s H goods supplied (Jlr Thornton appeared for the plain- }& t '\ Caldow/Vraiiam Cruickshank (Strath-laieri) claim L2l9s Ud, for goods sun!.nd ed OnMI;S^ ley f°r Athe P¥^ ff): D- Ben aZ and Co. v. George Arundel (Tinaroto, near Gisborne), claim Ll6 2s Sd, for goods supplied ; Alex Rennie v. Samuel Bushel (Balclutha), claim Ll Os 5d for meat supplied; Henry Lamer v. John Person Middlemarch), claim L 6 18s, for goods supplied ; Bhza Lawler v. Harry Meade, claim L 9 for nine weeks board aud lodging of defendant and his wife; Catherine Scott v. Margaret Fraser, claim L2, for two weeks' board and "lodging (Mr AH&% for- ff mtiPZ' A?lelia Muir v. datlferine hou (ohnstcll**rch), claim L4 6s Sd, for rent of a T Frederick MMier v. Edmund A. Harris—Claim L2 5s Od, on a judgment summons.—There was no appearance on behalf of the debtor, aud au order was made for the payment of the sum in two weeks, the first payment to be made within a week ; m default, seven days' imprisonment. Thomas Mills v. R. J. Stuart.—Claim Ll 3s 9d there was no appearance of the judgment creditor, and the case was accordingly struck out—Mr Meatyard, who appeared for the debtor, applied for his costs as he had been specially summoned to the court for the case.—The Bench replied that it was not usual to allow costs in judgment summons cases.