MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19042, 12 December 1923, Page 5

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tuesday, December 11. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) Judgment was given for palintiffs in the following undefended cases:—Taylor’s (Ltd.) v. Douglas Knowles, £7 Is 6d tor goods supplied (cost? £1 13s 6d) ; Keith Ramsay v. Andrew Watson M'Lean, £36 Ms for timber (costs £4 11s - 6d); T. N. do Spong v. L. 11. Smith, £2 10s hire of a suit (costs £1 3s 6d); Nestles and AngloSwiss Condensed Milk Company v. Arthur F. Munton, £1 6s 9d for a guaranteed debt (costs 10s); Swan and Co. v. Weaver and Stevenson (Auckland), £1 ISs 8d for goods supplied (costs 8s); same v. Ray Winger, Ltd. (Taumarunua), £4 10s 10s fc goods supplied (costs £1 3s 6d); H. S. Green v. L. Karitiana (Bluff), £l4 2s 4d c i an account stated (costs £2 14s); F. If. King and Co. (Ltd.) v. Alfred Mayne (Queenstown), £4l 15s 9d, balance due for goods supplied (costs Jb4 Is 6d); Para Rubber Company (Ltd.) v. R. Telfer (Maungatua), £25 18s 9d for goods supplied (costs £3 6s); R. S. Black v. Kaha Perawiti (Weraroa), £9 for money lent (costs £2 4s 6d); Mollisons (Ltd.) v. Wm. J. Torrey (Cardrona), £4 16s 4d for goods supplied (costs £1 3s 6d); M’Leod Bros. (Ltd.) v. W. Pitches, £5 15s for goods supplied (costs £1 5s 6d); Wise and Co. v. M. Roulston (Pahiatua), £7 13s lOd for advertising (costs £1 10s 6d); same v. F. S. Petre (Auckland), £8 3s 8d for advertising (costs £1 12s 6d); same v. G O’Connor (Dargaville), £1 10s for ad Yertising (costs 8s); same v. L. J. Mills (Thames), £4 IQs for advertising (costs £1 3s 6d); same v. Howard and White (Te Puke), £3 10s for advertising (costs £1 3s 6d); same v. Baddeley and Co. (Auckland), £7 Is lOd for advertising (costs £1 10s 6d); same v. Mary Paterson (Ashburton), £2 10s for advertising (costs £1 3s 6d); Wh. Hastie v. Robert Munro, £l7 for rent (costs £2 14s). Judgment Summons. —A. A. ,Peterson v. Harold J. Salmon, claim £8 10s on a judgment summons.—Mr J. S. Sinclair appeared for plaintiff, and in the absence of defendant an order was made for payment of the claim forthwith, with 10s costs, in default five days’ imprisonment. Sale of a Cow.—Alexander Brown Andrew v. A. D. Ross (Upper Junction), claim £8 18s 6d tor a cow which had been sold to plaintiff for £lO, guaranteed as sound, and re-sold by plaintiff at a loss of £6 12s 6d, the remainder of the-claim being made up of cost of sale and grazing.—Mr BaiTowclough .appeared for plaintiff and Mr Irwin for defendant. —Plaintiff stated that the owner of the cow had said that the animal was absolutely sound. There was nothing about the place that the cow could cut her udder on. The milk was running away from the udder. A teat appeared to have been half torn off, and a hole had been left from which the milk flowed.—Further evidence was given in support of the claim, it being mentioned that the injury appeared to have been caured by barbed wire a considerable time ago. There was no appearance of a scab, and the wound looked as if it were of long standing.—Under cross-examination one - witness stated that the wound could be healed in five weeks. —Defendant stated that he had told nlaintiff that he would bring the cow and calf (born siibscnnently) back, and would refund the money on certain conditions.— ’fire wife of defendant also gave evidence. —Plaintiff was norisuited, with costs (£1 is). Painting a House. —E. W. Gilliam v. H. I, M. Ross, claim £8 for painting and caldmining a house.—Mr Stephens appeared for defendant, the defence being that defendant had only acted as manager for a company.—Plaintiff was nonsuited, with costs.