SUPREME COURT SITTINGS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3040, 19 June 1912, Page 25

SUPREME COURT SITTINGS.

AUCKLAND, June 14. I A sentence of three months' imprisonment was imposed by Mr Justice Sim at the Supreme Court on .truest Isaac Cartier, bankrupt, against whom the Official Assignee had issued a summons to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of court. I WANGANUI, June 11. ' • At the Supreme Court to-day decrees ; nisi were granted in the cases Darby v. Darby, a wife's petition on the grounds of drunkenness and desertion, and Russell v. Russell, a wife's petition on the grounds of desertion. In the latter case % the husband secured a divorce from his wife at the notorious Reno. His Honor said that the case was very singular, and another might not occur again. It would not be fair to the petitioner that while she was still married to Russell, according to the laws of America, he was free to marry any American woman. June 13. i The case of Melody v. the Wanganui , Meat Freezing Company, a claim for • £2BOO compensation for injuries, was concluded to-night after a three days' hearing. Melody was a beef butcher in the employ of the company, and in the course of his work some bullock chains and a I " dropper " fell from a trolley, hitting him on the head" and totally incapacitat- ' ing him from pursuing his caJling. The plaintiff alleged defective apparatus. The t'ury found a verdict fox the defendant, mt considered that the accident was due to another employee's negligence. RecogI nising the extreme* hardship, suffering, and financial loss sustained by Melody, the i jury trusted that the company would see j its way to recompense him in some adej quate way and provide him with light > employment. Counsel for the company said it would make substantial recompense. No costs were asked for. PALMERSTON N., June 13. Mr Justice Chapman to-day granted a decree nisi in the case of Henry Russell Gaisford v. Ethel Louise Gaisford, on the grounds of adultery with a man who is now dead. There was a counter charge bv Mrs Gaisford against her husband, also of adultery, and a large bar was engaged. Mr Dolan, for Mrs Gaisford, withdrew her petition and did not defend the husband's petition. A decree nisi was granted. The parties were married on July 13, 1906 and were well known. There are two children. The couple have been separated since Easter, 1910. June 14. Judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Chapman in the Supreme Court to-day in the case Wm. Rankin v. John Alexander Mitchell, a claim for specific performance, with a counter claim for a refund of £lfifl deposit. The plaintiff sought to enforce a contract for the sale of a farm of 600 acres for £20,080. A deposit of £l5O had been made, and the counter claim was to recover this. The defendant sought to show that the land was subject to flooding, but his Honor held that the vveieht of evidence was against the defendant, who had failed to make out affirmatively that there was misrepresentation in the deal. Judgment was given for the plaintiff on the claim and counter claim, a I deoree fox specific performance to follow.