MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11797, 28 July 1900, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Fbiday, July 27. (Before Mr E. H. Carew, S.M.) Judgment was given by default in the following cases for the plaintiffs with costs:—Robt. Lcchhead (for whom Mr Moore appeared) v Michael M'Carthy (Alexandra. South), claim £6 ss, for hire of a sewing machine; Irvine and Stevenson (for whom Mr Payne appeared) v. Alexander Keir (Tapanui), claim £2 8s 7d, for goods supplied; a. Morrison (for whom Mr Finch appeared) v. Tyrell Turtill (Oamaru), claim 14s, for nickel plating parts of a bicycle. Christina Hansen v. Hans Hansen.—Claim a deed and receipt re land at Fairfield, one watch and chain, one white shirt, one set of studs, wrongfully detained.—There was no appearance of plaintiff.—Mr Moore appeared for defendant, and did not admit the claim. He stated the. articles were marriage presents, and asked for costs, stating that the case was a try on," and no solicitor would take it up. It costs were not granted defendant would simply bring 6n the case again, and bring defendant from Clinton to defend.—His Worship struck out the case, but stated there was no scale to allow costs, no vakte.having been attached to the articles.

William J. Watson v. Frederick Nelson (Timaru).—Claim £29 0s 10d,- on a judgment summons.—Mr Solomon appeared for plaintiff, —After defendant had been examined as to his means, his Worship declined to make an order, and dismissed the case.

S. M'Cutchcon v. Stone.—Claim £3, damages for breach, of agreement to lease or failure to give required notice, nnd £2 damages for removal of fixtures.—Mias Benjamin appeared for plaintiff and Mr Stephens for defendant.—The defence was that plaintiff having taken possession of and relet the premises, this operated as a surrender by operation of law; and that as to the fixtures, the plaintiff had agreed to pay for them, but afterwards refused.—Hia Worship decided that the tenancy was determined hy taking possession, but that defendant was not entitled to remove tho fixtures.' ■ He, therefore, gave judgment for pkir.liff for the value of the fixtures (£1 18s) and fis costs. Albert Evans v. William M'Stravick Stenhouse.—Claim £36 ss, being the amount of commission duo by defendant to plaintiff upon the sal.2 of a house.—Mr Solomon appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Sim for defendant.—After hearing the case, his Worship said that even on Dr Stenhouse's own evidence, he was inclined to think that the plaintiff was entitled to recover without going into the question of the conflict of evidence.—Judgment was given for plaintiff with costs amounting to £5 fe.