CLAIMS AGAINST A SOLICITOR.

Otago Witness, Issue 2884, 30 June 1909, Page 14

CLAIMS AGAINST A SOLICITOR.

TWO JUDGMENTS RECORDED. At the Magistrate's Court on the 22nd instant, before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M., lurther hearing of the case Gunn v. D. D. Maodonald, solicitor, was called. This case, dealing with th© payment of a. sum of money to defendant m connection with \fce clearance from bond of a quantity of whisky, was heard last Thursday, and was then adjourned to allow of further evidence— that of one ' John Macdonald, a, 'comm.ission agent oonoern>a<l — b&ing called. On the cass being called, Mr Gilkison appeared for plaintiff, but there was no appearance of <tefer.'Ciant or the witness, xor whose evidence the csse was adjourned. Mr (rilicison accordingly asked for jiwigmont, and eaid that h© .understood John Macdonald had bsen in court, ©p the first hoaxing of the ease, although he had^not recognised him, not knowing him by sight. His Worship^ said he "had noticed the report in the paper wao not quite correct. It had stated that he- had said that, injeren- . ; riaJly, - Jb>hn Maodonald "had been .paid. , What, he had said was that, inferentially,. , John, Macdonald was to be paid: .- , Judgment was given for plaintiff for- £l3 , and costs (£2 8s). - r A FURTHER CASE. [ . Later in the day William Spillano pro--baeded against D.' D. Mac-donald," solicitor, ' for- the sum of £23 15s 6d. Hr.ftfacdonaid '" did not appear. The plaintiff -sued -the defendant- on' the grounds— -(1) That on April 14 the plaintiff paid to the defendant the sum of £23" 12s ; (2) B;at on the said date the plaintiff in- ' structed the defendant to apply the eaid „ sum to the fat isf action of a judgment summons for £23 12s, which J. fc>. Ingram had , reoo vexed against the plaintiff on' April 6, 1909 y (3) that th-e defendant had wrongs , •. fully refused to pay bhe said sum of £25 ■ 12s in discharge of the- §a.id judgment; s (4> . that, , iv conj-stjuence of' .su-dh wrongful refusal, on April 15 a distress warrant 'was issued by' the said J. S. . Ingram agajnsfc the chattels of the plain-tiff to recover the amount of the said judgment; (5) that on. April 25, in execution of the said distress, warrant, the bailiff entered into possession, of the chattels cf the. .plaintiff , and in orderto prevent sole thereof the plaintiff was., -""obliged- to .pay. tho said J. S. - Ingram the " sum of £24 9sj (5V that on May 1 the de-, fondant gave to the plaintiff a oheque for tlie sum of £20 9s drawn by the defendant -on the Bank of New Zealand at Dunedin,, which cheque was' dishonoured on due presentment"; (7) that, by, reason of the premises, the" plaintiff had suffered -damage ffiiid incurred expense; (8) that the plaintiff claims to re-cover (a) "the sum of £20 3s, th© amount of the said 1 dishonoured^ dheque, together with the sum of' Ts 6d' (interest at the rate of 8 per cent', per annum from. ' May 1 to the da^e of judgment;, (b) the ; sum of £3 fe, the ba-la-fcos of the said sum • of £23 12s paid to -tho defendant ; (c) 'the sum of £5, special damage from tlie iesue and oxecution of the said distress - warrant. - The -plaintiff therefore claimed" tho sum of £28* 13s 6d. t - William Spillane,- expressman, said- that on April 14 last he" paid defendant a. ch»squ« for £23 12s, axxd Isis bank account had this amount chargefl against ib. T%;e ' cheque was to bs paid to Aslin .and 'Bed* ford on behalf of Ingram. "The baHiff entered plaintiff's fcousst on April'^26, and had taksn possession of his express and--horse. The bailiff remained in possession for a day. Defendamfc afterwaards gave witness a cheque for £20 9s, which had heien returned dishonoured. ..Witness suffered a good diedl of loss of ciiedit on ae-jcounfc-of the ■ bailiff's being seen in the po36S6si.Mll of his horse and trap. Harr-y?D. BedfoTdr, solicitor, eaid that- he acted 'for Ingram in tho oa&a of Ingram v. Spillane. After the ohequ« reoaived front, defendant- in the present case had been dis- - honourd he had been instructed by Mr Snillan© to act for him. They had done all they could to suit Mr .Maodonald's convenience and try. to, bring about a settlement -without gomg into court. The amount claimed for,-' damages -would nomore than pay the expen&es incurred.Judgment was given for .plaintiff for the- . full amount claimed, the costs being fil.6 3 -