MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20287, 21 December 1927, Page 17

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tuesday, December 20. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) DEFAULT CASES. Judgment for plaintiffs was given in the following cases; —W. Harris and Son, Ltd., v. William Gillespie (Luggate), claim £2 12s 6d, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 13s 6d); Dunedin and Suburban Coal Company v. C. T. Armishaw, claim £1 18s, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 3s) ; W. Scoular and Co., Ltd., v. S. Rutherford (Christchurch), claim £54 12s 2d, for goods supplied, with costs (£4 12s); Petrous Til e Company, Ltd., v. Angus Fife (Geraldine), claim £77 12s lid, for goods supplied, with costs (£5 2s 6d) ; E. J. Bryant v. James Henry 801 l and Thomas Henry Smith, claim £5, balance due on joint promissory note, with costs (£1 17s) ; Edith Beck v. John Darling (Mataura), claim £79 4s, for rent due, with costs (£4 19s 6d) ; W. W. M’Lachlan v. Brian D. MehafTey (Winton), claim £B, the amount of three dishonoured cheques, with costs (£1 10s 6d) ; John Edward Butler, Ltd., v. David James Fairweather (Invercargill), claim £29 6s Bd, amount of promissory note due, with costs (£4 3s 6d) ; Peter Boyd v. J. J. Appleton (Putaruru), claim £2 ss, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 7s 6d); Banquet Tea Company v. A. W. Grant (New Brighton), claim £3 3s 9d, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 4s 6d); Stuart M. Robertson v. E. Buddicom, claim £3 2s amount of account stated, with costs (£1 5s 6d); A. and T, Burt, Ltd., v. W. Styles, claim £2O Os 7d, for goods supplied, with costs (£4 2s 6d) ; Laidlaw and Gray Ltd v. D. J. Kn*wlos (Waimate), claim’ £2 15s 6d, for goods supplied with costs (£1 3s 6d) ; Brace, Win die, Blyth, and Co., Ltd., v. Henry Hall (Lumsden), claim £7 16s 3d, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 10s 6d). JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. A J Vidal and Sons v. Thomas Gardi. ner, claim £94 7s, on a judgment of the court.— After hearing evidence, the Magistrate refused to mak e an order and allowed costs (£2 2s) to the defendant. F. and F Martin, Ltd., v. Henry Barnett Scott, claim £5 16s 6d on a judgment of the court—After hearing defendant’s evidence, the Magistrate said he was satisfied that it was not a case' for an order, which was refused accordingly. A CLAIM DISALLOWED. His Worship gave his reserved judgment in the case in which Bessie M Cartnev (Mr R. Aspinall) claimed from Joseph Taylor (Eltham) (Mr W. G. Hay) the sum of £l6B for services rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant’s children from September 28, 1922, to December 2!, 1925, at £1 per week.—His Worship said that unfortunately the plaintiff appeared to have no legal claim on the defendant, but it seemed that the latter was under a moral obligation to recompense the plain tiff for her services. On the evidence, he had no other alternative but to give judgment for the defendant. Costs would not be allowed. A MOTOR COLLISION. Helen Riley claimed Iron Fatljei Michael Howard (Milton) £oo 4s, the amount of damage caused to the M aintl “ s motor through a car driven bv the defendant colliding with it in Stuart street on September 29. It was alleged by the plaintiff that th c collision was due to the defendant’s negligent driving.—-Mr W L Moore appeared for the plamtiii, and Mr J. B. Lallan for she defendant The defendant counter-claimed from the plaintiff £7 7s 3d, the cost of repairing damage caused to his car bv the negagent and unskilful driving ' r the plaintiff’s daughter. —Mercia Arnott a daughter of the plaintiff, stated that on the date in question, about H-10, sh ° was driving her mother’s car down Stuart street. She was on her correct side, ana near thc corner of Moray place she saw the defendant coming up the street.—Expecting him to give way, she drove right on with the result that her car was struck by that driven by defendant and turned rivht round. Although she had been driving for nearly a year she did not got her license until the afternoon of the day the collision occurred. When she first saw the defendant he seemed cO be slowing down to turn into Moray place north, but having seen him give the turning signal, she took no further interest in him, as she considered she was entitled to the right of way. She was not •'ware that she should give way to a car approaching from the right.—Dryden Rowan, works manager for Messrs Cooke, Howlison. who arrived on the scene ° few minutes after the collision occurred, gave evidence as to the position of the two cars, and stated that, when he asked the defendant what had happened, the iat.tei said he did not see the plaintiff’s car until the accident happened. Witness then give evidence as to the damage to both cars. In the case of the plaintiff’s car, the chassis was bent and considerable force would be required to do this. From the position of the cars, he considered that had Miss Arnott been travelling at an unreasonable speed the defendant’s car would hav € been damaged more than it was; further, it appeared that the form-r was well across the crossing when she was struck. In his opinion Miss Arnott was a capable driver. —Henry Smith M’Nicoll, chief traffic inspector for the City Corporation, gave evidence as to Miss Arnott’s capabilities as a driver, and stated that, from what he knew of the result of the collision, Miss Arnott could not have been travelling verv fast. In the circumstances, she had no right to be driving that moraine unless she had in experienced driver sitting alongside her. The defendant, in evidence, stated that just before the collision he was travelling at between 15 and 20 miles an hour, but slowed down considerably before lurni ing into Moray place. He had no distinct recollection of seeing the laintiff’s car before the accident occurred, but he had the impression that it was travelling at a high rate of speed. When the cars struck his machine was ..wisted round so that it was facinrr towards the Railway Station. —Constable Graham Hastie, who was called to the scene of the collision shortly after it occurred gave evidence as to the position if the cars when he arrived, and corroborative r idence as i to the speed of defendant’s -nr was given I bv Thomas Mnii who was ’riving with ! defendant. Witness also stated that prior to the collision he saw the plaintiff’s car coming towards Moray place at a fair speed.—The Magistrate reserved his decision.