LAW QUERIES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2842, 2 September 1908, Page 51

LAW QUERIES.

[Aitsio?re<l hy a Solicitor of th? . c i/»rc»ic Court o StW Zfilaad Letltis atul Teleoravix invst be aJditgsed lo "LUX," c/o JSditor, Otago H i£>i<f.s Onncdiu 1 Oecuardist. — You will be entitled to con> pensation. Perplexed. — (1) You omit to state the ground of dismis&al. (2) Yes. A. N — (]) The document is insufficient. A power of attorney drawn up in du-e form by a policior is what is required. (2) The stamp duty is 10s. W. B. — If the mare was waran'sd °ound and the tumbling exists in such a -degree t<J diminish the natural usefulness of the aninr.jl, you could succeed A. and B. — If the corner peg has l>ecn acquiesced in by adjoining fvners fry 10 years as denoting the boundary, B will I: bound also to acknowledge the cer.ire of the dram to bs the true dividing une. Subscriber ask 3: (1) What height must a fencs of tree 3be kept dov,r to' J My neighbour has a row of trees about 12ft high, ab.out 4ft from the boundary fence and 6ft from my house. (2) Have I the right to cut there down If he- won't? Aneweis: (1) Ihere is no standard heigh* fixed by law. (2) On the facts as s-tated you have no right to cut the trees down. F. J. asks: "If a man gets sentenced to lo yoar=' imprisonment, and then proves hirnielf innocent, is hi? name taken off the prison roll? If so. when did the act como in'o force'?" Answer: The najiie is nob eiascd iioui t-Le ynsou xolh and there i»

no statute in farce making provision for the deletion of the name frcon the prison roll. Resident Area.. — (1) Phe residence-site license entitles yiou to the exclusive occupation of the surface of the land comprised therein for the purpose of residing thereon and using andi cultivating the same as -a home. (2) Li you pay no rates, it is unlikely that the county council will expend money on a road to the properly. Box writes : " I am a farmer, and) a few nights ago I saw a dc-g making across a neighbour's paddock towards my own. That night I had 10 lambs worried and one ew« killed (her throat cut). The next, night I went to the paddock with my gun, and after watching for some time I came across ft dog tearing at the carcass of the sheep killed the previous night. I fired and killed the dog. I believed it to be the same dog I saw the previous night, and I certainly thought it my duty — first to myself, and secondly to my neighbours — to destroy it 'on sight/ I reckon it did at least £6 worth of damage. I wish to know: (1) Not actua-lly seeing the dog worrying a live- animal, was I justified in shooting it? (2) Can I sue the owner of the 3og for the damage dene? (3) Can the owner of the dog sue me for destroying it under the circum^tanoes?" Answers: (1) and (2) Yes.(3) Ii he does, he will not succeed in the action.