MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3197, 23 June 1915, Page 33

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, June 15. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) Default Cases. —Judgment by default for the plaintiff was given in each of the following cases: — Nimmo and Blair v. Marchand and 00., claim £1 4a 2d. for goods supplied (costs £1 12s 2d) ; William Dunford v. H. H. Vorrath, claim £3 8s 9d, for work done and goods supplied (costs 10s) ; Standard Insurance Company v. W. J. Masked, claim 10s 6d, for premiums due, judgment for 7s 6d (costs ss) : Alfred Oudaille v. J. L. Butts, claim £4, for goods supplied (costs 10s): Ernest O. Neos v. John Gibb, claim £l6 Is 9d, for furniture supplied (costs £1 10s 6d): Samuel Jarvis v. Abraham Geary, claim £3 15s, for clothing supplied (costs 10s), Thursday, June 17. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) Default Cases.—Judgment by default for the plaintiff was given in each of the following cases: —Smith and Smith v. P. Parroll, claim for £7, for goods supplied (costs £1 3s 6d); Mrs S. Green v. Arthur Vivian and Heldn Maud Vivian, claim for £ls 13s 3d, for interest duo under mortgage deed and money paid by plaintiff for defendants (costs £2 4s); Ahlfeld Bros, and Co. v. Mrs A. J. Petherick, claim for £2O 6s, amount of dishonoured promissory note (costs £2 14s); Two Bays Nurseries and Orchard Company Proprietary v. W. D. Thompson, claim for £25 7s, amount of dishonoured promissory note (costs £2 15s); Robert Wales v. N. J. Watson, claim for £3 12s, amount of account stated (costs 10s); Johnston, Sons, and Co. v. Robert Brown, claim for £1 14-s, for goods supplied (costs 12s); Mollisons (Ltd.) v. George Bruce Coutts, claim for £2 11s, for goods supplied, judgment for £2 2s (costs 10s). A Defended Case. —A. E. Ushorwood and Co., of Dunedin, soap and oil manufacturers (Mr W. L. Moore), claimed 4s 4d from Henry M'William, sen., of Milton, baker (Mr D. Reid), for oil supplied.—Mr Moore said that the oil was supplied for baking purposes. One tin was paid for. but though a portion of the contents of the second tin was also used defendant refused to pay for it. —The defendant said that ho did not use a portion of the second tin, as the appearance of the can indicated that the tin had leaked.—Mr Moore said that his witnesses were not in attendance.— Judgment was, accordingly given for the defendant, with costs (16s).