Resident Magistrate’s Court.

Waipawa Mail, Volume X, Issue 2036, 17 September 1887, Page 2

Resident Magistrate’s Court.

Ormondville, September 14. Before Capt Preece R.M. WIPE DESERTION. On the information of constable Siddles, Thomas Irviuo was charged with deserting his wife, Emile Irvine, and five children about 14 months ago. Emilio Irvine who was placed in the box stuted that she had had no monetary assistance since the dato stated except £2 from the Charitable aid. The Police informed the Bemh that the husband was at a sawmill at Gisborne and was earning constaut wages. The defendant was adjudged to pay 178 Gd per week every fourth week and 7s costs of court. ADOPTING A CHILD. Application under the Children’s Adoption Act, was made by Antono do Larnbo and wife to adopt Robert Cassell. Application granted. J UI>GM ENT BUMMONS. L. Athey v. R. Workman. Clnim £3 19 Gd. The defendant was ordered to pay the amount and 5s costs at the rate of 30s per month, first payment to be made on the 14th October ; in default cf that or any payment the whole to become due ; failing the payment of same 14 days in Napier gaol. CIVIL CASKS. George Youngman r. James Burt. Claim £lO. The plaintiff stated that he received a P. 0.0. from the defendant foi the amount claimed the day after lie had been served with the summons. The Bench gave judgment for the costs amounting to £1 Os Gd. J. Skinner v. W. 11. Howard. Claim £Gls4d. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount da lined and costs 15s. John- ttnscn v. E. Oben. Claim £l 9s Id. No nppearanco of defendant. Mr Louglinan for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with costs of Court Gs, Solicitor’s fee 10s Gd. Svcndsen and Moitensen v. F. Fredriksen. Claim £l7 Bs. No appearance of defendant. Mr Louglinan for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed witli costs of Court £1 58. Solicitor’s fee 21s, witness’s expenses 2s. J. Pettersen v. J. Climo. Claim £G 15s 7d. Mr Louglinan for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed and costs of court 12s, Solicitor’s fee 15s. J. W. Andrew v. Mrs Carmichael. Claim £l4. Mr Louglinan for defendant, Mr Gould for plaintiff. The defendant’s solicitor proved the actiou to have been commenced against the wrong party, but the defendant’s husband being willing the case was proceeded with and judgment entered up for £8 and costs of Court £l2, Solicitor’s fee 21s. J. B. Dunn v. Banner and Liddle£3 10s Mr Gould for plaintiff, Mr Liddle on behalf of Messrs Banner and Liddle defended. This case arose out of the late Licensing election at Norsewood. It appears that the defendants being inter ested in the Junction Hotel, were anxious to see a Bench elected who would be in favour of granting a license for the said hotel. Tli‘*y guaranteed tliuir agent in the bush all expenses incurred to further that end and the plaintiff claimed to have been engaged on the jobjas their agent. The job did not succeed and the defendants claimed that the expensesdemanded had not been earned. The) 7 also denied having made themselves liable for charge in connection with a proposed petition to upset the election, as the) 7 had taken legal advice in Napier, and finding that that they had no chance of success had given instructions to stop further proceedings. Subsequently the plaintiff had received £2 while at Napier, ns he alleged, on account only ; but the bench found that the su.li bad been accepted as payment in full and gave judgments for defendants with costs £1 2s Gd.

D. Martin v. W. llowcs.-—Claim £l2 15s. This was a claim for wages. Plaintiff proved the amount to be due except £2. Judgment for £lO 15s and costs, less £5 paid to plaintiff and £2 9* 8d paid into Court.

E. A. Laurvig v. Svendsen and Mortensen. Mr Louglinan foi defendants. Tliiri was niso a case of w >ges m connection with the Takapan mill belonging to defendants who alleged that the plaintiff had

only right to claim under a contract nnd not as a day laborer. The plaintiff alleged that the contract lasted only one month, at the end of which the agreement, was broken by the defendants and that he was on wages ns boss at the mill for the rest of his time. The plaintiff conducted his own case and had 7 witnesses the examination of which was going on when Jho evening train arrived. (Left Sitting.)