MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21521, 18 December 1931, Page 5

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Thursday, December 17. (Before Mr J. R, Bartholomew, g.M.) UNDEFENDED OASES. Judgment for the plaintiff was given in the following undefended cases:—A. J. Chrystall v. R. Miller, £7 15s, for goods supplied, with costs (£1 11s 6d) ; A. Roberts and Sons, Ltd., v. D. E. Hopkins, £27 Ds lOd, for goods supplied, with costs (£4 Is 6d) ; C. W. Patillo v. J. A. O’Keefe (Wyndham), £2, cost of photographs with costs (£1 7s 6d) ; John Maskill v. Thomas Blaney (Port Chalmers), £3 ss, being money lent, with costs (£1 3s 6d) ; Mercantile Industries, Ltd., v. M. Bardsley, ;£1 3s, for goods supplied, with costs (10s) ; Mercantile Industries, Ltd., v. W. Liddell (Invercargill), £4 ss, for goods supplied, with dosts (£1 3s 6d) ; Mercantile Industries. Ltd., v. W. M'Gill (Invercargill), £l, for goods supplied, with costs (8s) ; Reliable Loan and Investment Corporation, Ltd., y. Albert Edward Johnston, £6,- money due on promissory note, with costs (£1 10s 6d) ; John Edward Butler, Ltd., v. H. Markham, Ltd., £2O 19s sd, for goods supplied, with costs (£4 Is 6d) ; John Edward Butler, Ltd., v.. George Hosking (Kirwee)j £2O 8s 7d, for goods supplied, with costs (£4 ps 6d) ; John Trengrove v. L. Johnston (Auckland), 3s 3d, for goods supplied, with costs (3s) ; Prank Kemp v. Frederick Wright, £5 8s 4d, being wages due, with costs (£1 10s 6(3). JUDGMENT SUMMpNSES. Wallis Sycamore v. Frederick Wright, claiming £3j 8s 6d.-—The defendant was ordered to pay the amount claimed, with costs (9s), in default four days’ imprisonment. W. J. Pile v. D. J. Evans, claiming £ls 11s 4d.—-After the defendant had given evidence with reference to his financial position, the magistrate refused to make an order. “A FRIENDLY ACTION.” John Tennyson Smith and Ellen Mary Smith proceeded against the Public Trustee (as executor iof the estate of Elizabeth Mitchell Lindsay), claiming £l3 as. the balance owing on certain pieces of furniture purchased by the defendant from’ the plaintiffs. Counsel for the latter said that it was a friendly action, but it was thought best that the facts should be j placed before the court.—After hearing the evidence the magistrate gave judgment for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed, with costs (£1 10s). | CLAIM FOR SPECIAL SERVICES. Margaret * Paterson, proprietress of a convalescent home, proceeded against J. S. Rotting, of Wiugatui, claiming £2B 14s 6d. The statement of claim set out that the defendant’s wife entered the home in November, 1930. The plaintiff told the defendant that in tS6 eyent of his wife’s condition becomipg worse she would be compelled to secure! extra assistance for which there would bo an extra charge. The patient became worse, her illness eventually assuming a permanent character. The defendant authorised the plaintiff to obtain assistance and this was done. He subsequently paid tbe ordinary charges, but refused to pay for anything extra. The claim was made up of £2l 12s as special nursing fees for 10 weeks and two days,* and £7 2s 6d for bedding material that had to be destroyed.—After evidence in support of the claim had been heard, it was stated by the defendant that he had not been approached on the matter of increased rates in the event of his wife’s condition becoming worse. He had paid the original rate and denied liability for anything in excess of that—The magistrate, after reviewing the evidence, said that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount'claimed and gave judgment accordingly, with costs (£7 4s).