Hide Articles List

9 articles on this Page



HCLYHEAX COUNTY COURT. I The a.bove court was held on Tuesday before I his Honour Judge Sir Horatio Uoyd. CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURIES. I Jeremiah Jones, Kingsland, clainied from. T. 0. J ones, Tudno Stores, SSO damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained through having been run over by a trap belonging to the d&- fendants Mr J. Bryn Roberts, M.P. (instruct- ed by Mr R. T. Bvaiis), appeared for the plain- tiff, and Mr Tobin (instructed by Mr 11, E. Pritchard) for the defendant. It -was alleged that the plaintiff was run over by the defendant's oar, owing to the negligence of the driver, while the defendant contended that the driver was not in his employ at the time, as he WM off duty, and was simply driving to oblige another servant of his. Also that the accident was due to the horse having Aio&ILa Honour reserved his decision. OLAIMS FOR WAXJES. Ajine O. Jones, Oaergeiliog, sued O. G. Owen, Ty Lychyn, Rhosneigr, for 26 balance of wages Alleged to be due. Mr T. R. Evans appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr R H. Williams for de- fendant.—Plaintiff eaid she had been in de- fendant's service and he paid her wages for the first haJf year but not for the second half year. She was in service for twp months of the second half year and received notice to leave. She took out an afii.lin,j em summons against defendant, and he agreed and paid £14. but the wages were not included in that sunL-Orcss-emunined, she said she had- heen afferod bo pay her part of her wages. —■The Defendant oontended that the wages was included in the sum paid and that plaintiff was only entitled for wages for a part of the term.— His Honour held that she was entitled to the full amounl, and gave judgment for plaintiff wcord- ingly. Owen Jones, Tanyfawr, Oae'rgeUiog, sued 0. G. Owen, Rhosneigr, far Z8 wages due, and judg- ment was given in plaintiff's favour with costs. Mr T. R. Hvana was for the plaintiff, and Mr E. H. Williams for defendant AN AOTIOCf BETWEEN SOLICITORS. Mr R A. Griffith referred to the action of Qexxrgo Williams against R. E. Pritchard, solici- tor, Holyhead, and said it was an action to re- cover damages for alleged negligence. There were no particulars supplied, and an action of this kind should never have been brought against a solicitor without giving full particulars. He had written to Mr Evans, the solicitor for the plaintiff, and the reply was that Mr Evans was very busy, having just returned1 from London. I As solicitor for the defendant, it was impossible I for him to know how to conduct his defence. The particulars he required were AS to the al- leged negligence, and as to how the damages were assessed. Mr T. R. Evans, for the plaintiff, submitted iihat the particulars given were sufficient. He (Mr Evans) had just sued Mr Pritchard for hts cosbt, and a technical objection was taken to his bill as it#bad been signed by his clerk and not by him personally. As a matter of fact, Mr Griffith knew everything about the case, as no end of correspondence had passed between the parties. Mr Griffith submitted that the particulars should be reduoed to writing as to the alleged negligence and damagea In the first instance, Mr Evans had brought an action against Mr Pritchard for;ClD which he considered excessive, and therefore took a technical objection. Hit Honour held that.the particulars should be before the court, and he adjourned the case in order that particulars be supplied. A DENTISTS CJLAIM. I Mr J. A. Wibon. dentist, Bangor, sued Mr W. Banks, dml)er, Hb!yhead, for a baJance of 92 10& 6d alleged to 00 due in respect of a set of wti- fidal teeth supplied to defendant's wife. Mr T. R. Evans appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr R. It PritchaixJ for the defendant.—The Plaintiff stated that the price agreed- was j37. and that he oad done other work value 108 6d for the de- fendant's daughWm-Tlie Defendant contended that the price was £5, which eum, the plaintiff had obtained.—Judgment was given for the de- fendant with ooetfl. AN ACTION CONCERNING TITHES. I Mr W. Watkin Owen, of Rhoebeano Farm, near Rhosgooh. aued the Rev. Daniel Morgan, the former rector of Rhoebeirio, which consti- tutes the whole pariah, and now Teetor of Llan- triaant, for the sum of jB4 6s 8d, being land tax on tithes paid by him on behalf of the defendant whilst; rector for the years 1881 to 1889. :K 0- tice of the Statute of Limitations had been de- ttrered by the rector's solicitors, but this was too late. Mr J. Bryn Roberts, M.P. (instructed by Mr T.\ R. Evans), appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr R H. Prioohard (of Messrs Hughes- Pritchard and Rodway, Bangor) appeared for the de,fendanb.-The defendant's solicitor said he submitted to judgment, as his client had been misled by an old law book, the Acta quoted in1 which had been repealed some 40 years ago. Judgment was accordingly entered for the plain- tiff for the amount claimed. OLAIH FOR WORK. Robert P&rry, Penlleca, Llanfair M.E., plasterer, stidd William Thomas, Rhoefawr, Llan- fair M.E., for ES balance alleged to be due for work done. Mr R. A. Griffith, Bangor, appear- ed for the plaintiff, and Mr S. R Dew for the defendant.—It appeared that the defendant had entered into a oontraot with a Mr Thomas Grif- fith to build a houee for him, but before com- pleting the house Griffith beoame insolvent. For the defence it was oontended that plaintiff had been employed by the contractor and not by defendant.Judgment was given for the de- fendant.



Welsh Markets, Ao: 1____-…

Looal Tide Table* I


Racing Fiztursi. <


[No title]