APPLICATION BY LAW SOCIETY IS HEARD.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19201, 15 October 1930, Page 7

APPLICATION BY LAW SOCIETY IS HEARD.

ALLEGATIONS ARE MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS

Per Press Association.

WELLINGTON, October 15

Continuing argument before the Court of Appeal to-day in the case of the Law Society against John Charles Carroll and John Ponsonby Somers, barristers and solicitors, of Te Aroha, struck oft the rolls, Mr H. F. von Haast said that the examination of the books of the partnership showed - that advances had been made to a man named Billings, who apparently was connected with the practitioners in business ventures, out of trust funds belonging to other clients, without the consent of the Letter and without disclosing to them the connection between Billings and the firm. Mr von Haast submitted that such conduct was highly improper and unprofessional, and deserved the condemnation of the Court. Mr G. P. Finlay (Auckland), who appeared for the practitioners, said that he wanted to make it perfectly clear that for what the men had done that was wrong he was not standing as advocate. All he wanted to do was to show the Court the true character and extent of the wrong doing. Mr von Ilaast, he contended, had innocently misinterpreted the true character of the transactions, for, at the end of i January, 1930, after a sudden audit had been made, the books had been proven to be clear. There was sufficient moneys to meet all demands, and the firm could say- with confidence that it had paid all moneys to all its clients in the amounts to which they were entitled.

The allegations against the practitioners are:—(l) That they failed to have their trust account audited for the year ended March 31, 1927. (2) That between April, 1929, and July, 1930, they appropriated to various clients trust moneys belonging to other clients without the latter's consent. <3> That between April, 1929, and January, 1930, they improperly and without the consent of the administrator of a certain estate converted to their own use £495 held in trust for that estate. (4) That they were generally unfitted for practice as barristers and solicitors, on account of the above allegations and on account of their failure to reply to communictions addressed to them by the Hamilton Law Society.