SUPREME COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2617, 27 September 1909, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. (Before His Honor, Mr Justice Cooper, Saturday, September 25.

FOOT RACE SEQUEL

At the Supreme Court, on Saturday morning, argument was heard in the case in which Robert Peterson sued Arthur Tutley Webb for £412, which was paid over to defendant by the stakeholders in connection with the race between James Sexton and Michael Griffen on August 12th. Mr. G. Stodk, for defendant, had pleaded for a non-suit. Mr. Burnard, for the plaintiff, said that for the purposes of argument he would assume that it had been proved that- the defendant had heard the plaintiff tell Burrows not to pay the money over. Counsel contended that as soon os Peterson had called the wager off the stakeholder was holding the money for his use, and Webb knowing this when he received the money, was also holding it for the plaintiff’s use. His Honor: But there is no evidence that this was the actual money. It was not as if any article, say a cup, had been handed over.

The Judge replied to Mr. Burnard that Webb could no# be regarded to have held the money in the same position as the stakeholder. It appeared to His Honor that Webb had received the money for Griffen. .(Supposing the stakeholder had paid over the money' direct to Griffen even though Sexton had forbidden him, would Sexton liavo a cause for action against Griffen Hils Honor thought not, though, of course, action could havo been taken against the stakeholder. Mr. Burnard contended that when Burrows received notice not to pay he was holding half of the money in his possession to the use of the plaintiff and it was this he paid over. His Honor: If that is so you have cause of action against him. Counsel: We are in the unfortunate position in this case in having a stakeholder who is not worth suing. His Honor said that from a theoretical point of view the case was an important one, and he would take time to oonsider it. His Honor had not heard of any case in which the Judge had gone so far as Mr. Burnard had asked him to go, in this case, and he would have to look up authorities that were not at present available. Hi s Honor intimated that he would be pleased to look over any cases that either side might submit to him. Mr. fclt-oek said that he would await the issue of the non-suit before calling evidence. j His Honor said that if the non-suit was not granted,. lie would allow the evidence for the defence to be taken before the Registrar -and forwarded to him. He would in the meantime reserve his decision.

AFFILIATION CASE APPEAL. Donald McKefJar, sheepfarmer, of Patutahi, appealed against the decision of the Gisborne Stipendiary Magistrate, given on July 23, adjudging him the father of the illegitimate child of Mary Elizabeth Rogers, and maJking an order for the payment of 8s a week, £22 Is expenses, and £2 2s costs. Messrs Blair and Samsbury appeared for the appellant, and Mr, G. Stock for the respondent. M. E. Rogers gave evidence on the ■lines of that given in the lower Court in July. . , .. . . , After re-kearing the evidence, winch occupied the greater part of the afternoon His Honor found in favor of the appellant, and dismissed the _ complaint without costs and without prejudice to any further action that might be taken by the plaintiff if fresh evidence were forthcoming. The Judge remarked that the evidence was exceedingly unsatisfactory.