MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13890, 30 April 1907, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, Amui, 29. (Uefcro 'Mr 11. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) Judgment wag given for plliintifTs, by <lcJimlt, in llio [olluv.'ing cases:—D.l,(J. v. tloorge W. W (OUutniil, claim £(S J2s 3d, for goods supplied, (eosls fl 33 01); William Carson v. L)ib ldolir (liuwlior, South Dnncdin), uiaim £J lis 6d, for iiirc o[ horse, c:irt, anil Jinnies-) (costs sa); AV. T. Jlonltinan and L. It. Wilson v. J nines Long (Clirisfclmrcli), claim .C 8 17s Id, amount due O'l a dishonoured promissory note (ousts il 3s Gil); J. J. Oonnor v. George Lusl; (Wellington), claim £2 Oj Gd, b.r.ird and IcdgiiiL' (eoot3 IDs); JTorinnn U. Uell v. F. 13. liobinsoii ('L'inv.altl). chtini £o, oil a dishonoured ihc'nup (costs sa); liucliliond (Ltd.) v. George C. Huberts (liullor), claim £2 sk, balance on goods eo'il and delivered (costs lUs); I'ii.tcrson and I'.irr v. Joseph 1!. Sneli (Mos-jit'l), claim £J IPs lid, goods sold and delivered (costs IDs); l'aterson and Ua-rr v. C. J. Moreiou (lialoiutha), claim XI 19s ud, on an account stated (costs ss); Andrew Johnson v. Thoin;is Flojd (Auckland), claim £'i Is Id, goads sold and delivered (co-is I<>.<); Stokes and Son v. William Al'ltuy (Timaril), claim £!) 5s Gd. gofids supplied (costs Xs); executors of Andrew Lees v. Theodore 11. Gov (Tetiniksv), claim i'S Is &1, amount of promissory noiu v-nri interest thereon (ousts £1 ;ls (HI); Hwiry Kldriugo v. James 11. Travis (Alexandra, South), claim n 12s Id. amount duo on pormissorv note and iutifost thereon (cos's IDs); limvn, liwing, and Co. (Lid.) v. (100. Huiscll ((.lore), claim £4 IDs, goods sold and delivered (costs lOe); National, Mortgage, a'od Agency Coni[)any v. I'rank I'oll (Souililaud). claim £3S Is lid, balance duo on goods told and delivered (costs 63); Jessie .Mee't v. 1 Luji Agncw, claim £2 l!ls, balance due for luurd and lodging and express hiro (costs 11).-).

Judgment Summonses—l 3. S. Irwin v. Alexander M'Lemiau.—Claim £V 11?, [or professional services rendered.—There \v:is no jppcaraiß'o of defendant, and nil order. was iiuulo that unless (he amount claimed, with 5s expenses, bp paid forthwith, the defendant bo imprisoned in Dunedin for three K. Wilson and Co, v. Arthur C. Isiip (licugli Klii;;e).—Cliiim i'J3 ]:">3 Id, goods «»M and delivered.—Thero » no appearance of dclendant. and the magistrate mnile an order that unless the defendant pay (lie au'.cuni claimed, with expense* (XI 17s), on or heforo Jlav 6 he be imprisoned in Dnnorlin lor (six weeks,--—-IXago Farmers' Co-opcraiivo Association v. Arthur C. Is'.ip (Hcn'»b liidge).--Claim' .I'll 8s M. bnl.meo duo on goods sold and. doHvc-rod.—There w-.w no appearance of doicudaiit, :<nd an ortiw v.:;s mads (hat unless (he amount claimed, v.'ith expenses (Jt'-i 17s 0:1). be paid on or Mist May (i tlio defendant be in Duiiiyl'"n {or 23 duvs.

CI. J. Scott (l'almorriton North). as 'Dialriot Ollic-nJ Assignee in the osteto of A. 11. Sadd, smi I'avrwi] Mil Abralinui, Ltd. (I'almcrston Xwil:) v. Jlendolwlin r.t:d Son.—Claim lo U'covc: J32 15s for failure to deliver Kl.Ofli) ci;.r;;:rt-'.c". imdftr ronti'aet and arrangement ■Willi , J .. 11. SiuM.-Mr J. appeared ■for plaintiffs. and Jlr liumard for detenu»:i!s.—in '.his case, evidence ir which was

concluded on Thursday, tho Magistrate Mi-

muted that on the merits of tho action judg-. i lueiit should bo given against, the defendant,, j but tie present plaintilt (the official assignee)] was not tho proper plaintiff to rcceivo judg-. ment. He suggested tlwifc th& mooter; lxs allowed to stand over in order to enablo the parties on cither side to settle. tho mater or mako such further- application as might lw advised.—Tho suggestion waft concurred in by counsel' for Uio parlies concerned..