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

R.M. COURT, MASTERTON.

' [Before H. S. Wardell, Esq., JUL] G, S. W. Dalrymple v. John MeDermott.—Debt £5 lGs 6d, Mr Skipper for plaintiff, Mr Bunny for defendant. The ciaim was made for services rendered in connection with obtaining from Major Heaphy, a certificate to a deed placed in plaintiff's hands as a commission agent, and for money lent. A portion of the claim £3 2s Gd was abandoned as plaintiff could not furnish particulars of certain charges which he alleged his Wellington agent had made. Mr Bunny for the defence, asserted that plaintiff could on sue for tlie money lent, and which his client had subsequently repaid. He alleged that the plaintiff had in his application to Major Heaphy contravened the Conveyancing Act by doing solicitor's work, and making more than solicitors charges, The plainlitl', if he got a verdict would be liable to a penalty of £SO. His Worship held that tlie plaintiff had not: contravened the conveyancing ordinance, and compared with ordinary solicitor's charges, plaintiffs claim was a very moderate one. He characterised as ridiculous tho attempt made to show that plaintiff had acted as a solicitor. He was satisfied that the money lent had not been repaid, and would give judgement for £2l4s Cd and costs.

J, Douglas v. J, Harvey, jn».—Debt, ;'il3. Mr Bunny for plaintiff, Mr Skipper for defendant. The claim was made for grazing 200 sheep for a period of 13 weeks and the only material point in dispute was what, in the absence of a specific agreement, was a resonablo charge to mike.

His Worship expressed an opinion that the case was one that should have been arranged out of Court, The counsel for the plaintiff preferred his Worship's decision, and after a considerable amount of evidence had been taken, judgement was given in favor of plaintiff for £7 10s and costs.

Daniel Cross v. Thomas Redding— Judgment summons, LG 2s, Order made. 6. Woodroofe v. Orlando Gorringe— Damages, L 25. Mr Skipper for plaintiff, Mr Bunny for defendant. Plaintiff nonsuited. Job Yile v. William McDonald. Illegally on premises, Dismissed.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WDT18790308.2.6

Bibliographic details

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 103, 8 March 1879, Page 2

Word Count
347

R.M. COURT, MASTERTON. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 103, 8 March 1879, Page 2

R.M. COURT, MASTERTON. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 103, 8 March 1879, Page 2

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