Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.) Thursday, 13th July.

Dale and M'Nickle v. Bvdie.ll. — Claim, £29 135., for goods sold and delivered. Mr. Copland for plaintiffs. Mr. M'Coy, for defendants, moved for a non-suit, stating that there were more than usual grounds for this application. The defendant knew nothing about Dale in the transaction, his business being with M'Nickle only ; and if he sued, the defendaut had several pleas which he was at present debarred from pleading. The defendant had a set-off of over £30, which was only 25 per cent, of the amount due to him by M'Nickle, he having compromised for ss. in the pound. The defendant could also plead M'Nickle's insolvency. The learned counsel also contended that the defendant had not been furnished with sufficient particulars. Mr. Copland replied, and read from several authorities in support of his views, that it was not necessary to furnish particulars more fully than had been done. His Worship, without ruling at present with regard to the application for a nonsuit, ordered the case to go on. W. M'Nickle, sworn — 1 was formerly a grocer in Lawrence. I supplied goods to Mr. Bushell. There is a balance of £29 13s. due to my estate from him. Mr. Copland then read the deed of assignment of the debts due to M'Nickle's estate to Dale. Mr. M'Coy, for the defence, relied upon his application for a non-suit, stating that it was quite clear his client was not indebted to M'Nickle ; he never was indebted to Dale ; and ceriainly not indebted to Dale and M'Nickle. The sum of £28 only appeared in the deed of assignment. The learned counsel said the action should have been brought by M'Nickle only ; he should then have an opportunity of pleading set-off and insolvency.

His Worship deferred his decision on the arguments for a non- suit until Monday.

Bushel v. M-Nickh.— Claim, £31, for cartage of oats, &c. Mr, M'Coy for plaintiff ; Mr. Copland for defendant.

Bushell occupied the time of the Court many hunrs in endeavouring to elucidate his accounts against M'Nickle, and his Woiship at last adjourned the case till Monday. [The remainder of the report is held over.]

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TT18710720.2.15

Bibliographic details

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 180, 20 July 1871, Page 5

Word Count
367

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 180, 20 July 1871, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE. Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 180, 20 July 1871, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert