MEMORIAL ON WRONG PLOT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 19049, 30 June 1924, Page 11

MEMORIAL ON WRONG PLOT

AN AUCKLAND CASE. (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, June 28. The question as to who should bear the loss incurred through an error in the erection of a memorial over a grave was involved in a case in which judgment was given by Mr. Poynton, S.M. Mrs. Mary O’Gorman, widow, sought to recover £2O damages from Parkinson and Company, monumental masons. The Magistrate said that when the plaintiff’s husband died she purchased two allotmnts at Waikumete Cemetery. In one of them her husband was interred. Plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant to erect a memorial- over the grave, including both lots. Subsequently it was discovered that the memorial was erected over numbers 92 and 94 allotments, leaving out number 90. It would cost £l4 10s to rectify the error. The claim was for £2O damages, the estimated cost of shifting the memorial to its proper position. Defendant explained that it was customary for the sexton to point out to the monumental mason. the graves over which memorials were to be erected, and in this case the sexton must have made a mistake. The sexton was called but could not remember the incident at all. Plaintiff relied on defendant to put a memorial in a certain place, but by some error the memorial was put in the wrong place. When the plaintiff gave the defendant certificates of purchase, as the title documents to grave plots are called, it was the duty of the defendant to see that the memorial was put over them. Mr. Poynton said he was of opinion the cost of shifting the me- ' should be paid by the defendJudgment was for the plaintiff for £l4 10s and costs.