JUDGMENT GIVEN FOR PLAINTIFFS BY DEFAULT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19134, 29 July 1930, Page 6

JUDGMENT GIVEN FOR PLAINTIFFS BY DEFAULT.

Mr 11. A. Young, S.M., presided at a sitting of the Civil Court to-day. Judgment for plaintiff by default was given in the following cases: J. E. Cook v. Alfred Grenfell, £6 0s sd; Vacuum Oil Co. Proprietary, Ltd., v. P. Dickel, £2 12s; the New Zealand Farmers’ ,Co-operative Association of Canterbury, Ltd., v. J. E. Loader, 15s 6d; A. J. White, Ltd., v. R. Mayer, £8 7s; F. E. Longdiu v. James E. Hooper, £2 10s; M. Ritchie and Co.. Ltd., v. Mrs T. Ryan, £l3 Ss; Drapery and General Importing Co. of New Zealand, Ltd., v. W. T. Woods, £34 12s lid; W. 11. Simms and Sons, Ltd., v. W. Gower, £9 7s 4d; A J. Park and Son v. F. F. Kirby, £5 ss; New Zealand Farmers’ Co-operative Association of Canterbury, Ltd., v. G. L. Percy, £lO 2s 7d; Harris Bros., Ltd., v. Robert Chambers Bellam, £ll 9s; The Drapery and General Importing Co. of New Zealand, Ltd., v. R. Brown, £3 9s; John Craig and Francis Ross Craig v. Horace Taigel, £2l 10s; R. Wright v Samuel Jones, £10; Maling and Co.. Ltd., v. A. Elgar, £6 3s; Henry Cooper Smith v. Frederick John Maindonald, £3S 15s; The Lumber and Fruit Case Co., Ltd., v, George Patton, £4 13s 3d; J. Dudley Trent v. W. Franklin, £1 15s; W. J. LeCren, trading as The Crown Iron Works Co., v. Reads Motors, £4 10s 6d; F. W. Brightling \\ Arthur Walter Button, £2O. Judgment Summonses. G. B. Cullen was ordered to pay C. E. Otley and Co., Ltd., the sum of £G 5s 6d, in default seven days’ imprisonment. A. Dowling was ordered to pay the New Zealand Farmers* Co-operative Association of Canterbury, Ltd., the sum of £1 11s 9d, in default three days’ imprisonment. L. L. Ilalcrow was ordered to pay A. A. Hunt the sum of £3O Cs 6d, in default thirty-two days’ imprisonment. Claim Over Car. D. C. Dorrance, of Christchurch, trading as the Canterbury Used Car Cornpan}', claimed from F. C. Meade, of 8, Harper Street, the sum of £3O, being the amount of purchase money on a car said to have been sold by plaintiff company to defendant. The Magistrate held that there had not been a bindnig agreement and gave judgment for defendant.