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

CHARGE AGAINST A SOLICITOR.

ALLEGED PROFESSIONAL MISCON-

DUCT 1.

DUNEDIN, December 13. The Supreme Court was engaged today in a case in which application was made to make absolute a- rule nisi callr ing on.F.Z. Moore to show cause why he should not be struck off the roll'of solicitors or why he should not be suspended from practice on the grounds of alleged professional misconduct. W. C. MacGregor, who appeared for Moore, said it was difficult to find out what the charges were. What he gathered was that tModre took proceedings against Mark Rogers, coal merchant, on a judgment summons, without authority, and that he continued the proceedings after the withdrawal of any implied authority. Moore had been engaged to collect certain overdue calls to the Prince Arthur Dredging Company. Among others from Rogers he endeavoured to enforce payment by.the attachment of an order, but the liability was evaded and matters drifted on. The company went into liquidation, and the assets were sold to a new company, and a liquidator appointed on the strength of previous instructions. A judgment summons had been taken out against Rogers, and it was the latter who went to the Law Society. Mr MacGregor, in the course of 'his address, contended (1) that F. Z. Moore bad aiotfhiqg to do with the issue of the summons, but simply signed the papers placed before him by tihe clerks in the, ordinary routine of office business, (2) that ihe had to rely on his clerks for instructions from the liquidaitoja*. (3). <tbat Mcore genuinely believed^m good faith he was acting under instructions from McCracken, the liquidator; he thought it. monstrous that a man should be brought before the Court and held up to public obloquy on a, penal charge because a defaulting defendant 'had refused, owing to a technicality in connection with the proceedings, to pay a just debt. After Adams, had been' heard on behalf of the Law Society, Justice Williams said he would give a written decision.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WC19051214.2.34

Bibliographic details

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12678, 14 December 1905, Page 5

Word Count
332

CHARGE AGAINST A SOLICITOR. Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12678, 14 December 1905, Page 5

CHARGE AGAINST A SOLICITOR. Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12678, 14 December 1905, 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