McLACHLAN v. WHITE.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12145, 7 September 1908, Page 8

McLACHLAN v. WHITE.

above "action, va claim for' £70j sdainages/for'malicious prosecution and '[falsS imprisoriment,- was heard last week a Defor©! a: jufy of •foiu\-'-;;;:The''-'3m vy;':";d.is-' agreed on the issues placed before them. Mr Cohen, for defendant, had moved "for'V non-suit, and His Honour said he would hear argument ion same. • v . Mi* ■Hutchisonj for iplaintiff, contended^ihate as the^ jury had disagreed oil matters of/fact the case should be tried ?agaih;.f- TKe niotio-n ior. a non-suit could not bo heard in the absence of a ver;diet:" v .■,'■"..'..-.. . :.-■ ■ . ■ ■ :.- ■ •

His Honour said the plaintiff had called evidence for.'hisi casey the' defendant had moved for a non-suit, and the question was. reserved. The defendant's ..ovidcrieo had.bofen heard, and the facts put to the jury, who had. disagreed. It was a peculiar feature, but he did not think ;it affected the question or his ability to hear a motion for a nonsuit. A judge had no power to move the caso into ihi Court, of Appeal, and the de;fendant would not; consent to that ■ ■■cditrso: rt/w as. a point of practice. His Honour said he would, reserve the point raised by Mi- Hutchison, and would liear argumont on the nonsuit motion.

Mr Cohen then concluded his argument for a nonsuit oil the grounds as stated previously, arid! Mr Hutchison replied. "■■ '■■■-. ...'-.. :' ■ :

After hearing •considerable argument Hi.-; Honour resei-ved his. decision, v

Tho Court adjourned at 1 p.m. until 2 p.m. -