Showing 1933 results

Archival description
John Keenlyside Legal Research Collection
Print preview Hierarchy View:

617 results with digital objects Show results with digital objects

Puckett, an Infant v. John Quagliotti

File consists of four documents: affidavit of service, affidavit of W.R. Puckett; order for Habeus Corpus; affidavit of J. Quagliotti. Case regards W. Puckett had entrusted the care of the child to J. Quagliotti to board and keep the child as her mother had died. When the child was of seven or eight years old, Puckett claiming to re-take custody of the child.

Irving v. Nesbitt

File consists of 2 documents: Affidavit of Mrs. Nesbitt; Affidavit of E. Irving. In the matter of W. Dickson, an infant. Upon the death of his father, the boy and his brother had been left in the care of the Irvings. Upon his brother's death, the boy had been sent to the Nesbitt family in Victoria 'for change'. Irving charges that the Nesbitts will no longer allow them to visit with the boy and that his education and religious instruction are not being properly attended to by the Nesbitts. They are suing for full custody of the child.

R. v. Simmonds (10 docs); Charged with assault; 1876/01/00

Indictment for assault of Maggie, an Indian girl; trial was stopped because judge
recommended more serious charge of rape; Victoria; 1876/01/01
Indictment for rape of Maggie; verdict guilty; sentence 7 years with hard labour;
1876/01/02
Information of Maggie; a Songhish Indian girl; 1876/01/03
Deposition of Maggie; 1876/01/04
Deposition of Thos. Lindsay; Victoria constable; 1876/01/05
Deposition of PeterWilliams; 1876/01/06
Deposition of Jack; a Songhish Indian; 1876/01/07
Deposition of Mary; a Songhish Indian; 1876/01/08
Deposition of Marc Walton; 1876/01/09
Affidavit of H. Courtenay; 1876/01/10

Turner v. Black

File consists of four documents: Receipt for $3.00; Summons; Affidavit of Service; Judgment by Default. Plaintiff claims $1,008 principal and interest due on an unpaid promissory note from the Defendant

Milby v. Heeley

File consists of four documents: Summons; Plaintiffs Costs, Affidavit of Service; Judgment by Default. Plaintiff claims $594.50 for debt, $40 for costs on an unpaid promissory note from the Defendant

Cohen vs. the Phoenix Fire Assurance Company

(2) Notice; (3) Correspondences; (3) Affidavit of T.C. Nuttall; Costs; (3) Order; Affidavit of W.M. Ehner; Costs of Defendant; Summons; Affidavit of W. Wilson; Bill of Costs; Bills of Costs taxed under reference.

-Cohen had a fire at this business for which he was insured and covered by the Phoenix Fire Assurance Company. The two aprties appear to be disputing over their costs and extent of coverage.

Johns vs. Major et al; Major et al vs. Johns

Affidavit of F.W. Pafford; Power of Attorney; Affidavit of Johns for Leave to Defend.

-L.Johns was an agent of J. Cunningham and carried on the business affairs of Cunningham as his attorney. Major and others claims $181.19 principal and interest due to them as payee on two promissory notes signed by Johns on behalf of Cunningham. Johns claims he never accepted the bills, and defends that this signature on the bills is merely to show that he endorsed the same with the name of James Cunningham.

Stromach vs. Prevost at al

Writ of Summons; Notice; Appeal from the County Court of British Columbia.

-The Defendants are charged with stealing the goods and chattels of the Plaintiff and disposing of them for their own use. The Plaintiff claims on account thereof $100.

Mason vs. Bate

(2) Affidavit of N. Shakespeare; (2) Affidavit of A.C. Elliot; Affidavit of M. bate; Affidavit of R. Plummer; Cross-examination of A.C. Elliot; Cross-Examination of R. Plummer; Affidavit of H.S. Mason; (2) Affidavit of R. Plummer; Affidavit of F.W. Egerton; Affidavit of H.F. Heisterman; Affidavit of W.G. Burroughs; Affidavit of W. Jackson; Summons for Time to Answer.

-Mason is the administrator of the estate of W. Rippon. the case deals with the overall settlement of the estate with the creditors and debtors and the various disputes that have arisen over the sale of a certain piece of property.

R. v. Portlett et al. (4 docs); Charged with wilful [sic] murder; 1875/01/00

Indictment of Portlett and Macmooy-sock-me; with Macmooy-sock-me for murder of
No-look-a-me. True Bill by Robert Dunsmuir, Nanaimo. Verdict not guilty; Nanaimo;
1875/01/01
Deposition of Charley; an Indian, interpreted; 1875/01/01
Deposition of Macmooy; an Indian, interpreted; 1875/01/02
Deposition of Sal-la-coot-sa; an Indian, interpreted; 1875/01/03

R. v. Ah Bow ( 5 docs); Charged with breaking & entering & theft; 1875/05/00

Commitment of Ah Bow; to trial at New Westminster assize; 1875/05/01
Recognisances; to prosecute and give evidence; 1875/05/02
Deposition of Ellard; re theft of meerschaum pipes and knives; 1875/05/03
Deposition of Jackson; 1875/05/04
Statement of Ah Bow; all statements witnessed by Arthur Bushby, James Douglas‟ sonin-
law; 1875/05/05

Morton vs Drummond

Petition.

-Morton and Drummond had been candidates for election for the office of mayor holder in Victoria. Morton is charging that the list of voters used at the election for mayor was made out in a manner contrary to law and contained the names of many people who were not supposed to be on the voters list. The voters list was based on a Road Tax List, which had not been revised for the year 1874, and contained a great many names that had been put on it for the purpose of enabling them to vote. Morton charges that Drummond won the election as a result of these people that weren't supposed to be voting and asks that the election results be declared void and Drummond be removed from the position.

Jacobs v. Oliver

File consists of one document: bill of complaint. Case regards the suite above the St. Nicholas Restaurant in the St. George Hotel on Government Street. Landlord is evicting tenant, even though he has been paying his rent and Defendant Oliver is holding that he is entitled to a one month's notice.

Cohn v. Pheonix Assurance Company

File consists of two documents: Costs of Judgment; Judgment regarding an insurance policy made by the Defendants after setting forth that the Plaintiff had paid $60 to the Company for insurance from loss or damage by fire to the amount of $3,000 which they were not intending to honor when the Plaintiffs property suffered water damage.

Raymur v. Finley

File consists of seven documents: Affidavit of E. Johnson in Support of Summons; Judgment by Default; Affidavit of E. Finney; Affidavit of Service; Exhibit "A" - receipt for $332.50; Writ; Plaintiffs Bill of Costs. Plaintiff claims $1,461.68 for lumber and goods supplied to the Defendant at his request

Wilson v. Brown

File consists of four documents: Judgment by Default; Summons; Affidavit of Service; Plaintiffs Costs. Plaintiff claims $64 for debt, $17.50 for costs as principal due from the Plaintiff on an unpaid promissory note

Morton v. Drummond

File consists of 2 documents: Affidavit of C. Morton; Correspondence regarding Inspection of Poll Books. Morton, a hotelkeeper, is claiming the office of mayor in consequence of the illegal acts of J. Drummond. Morton and Drummond had both been candidates for the office of Mayor in Victoria by which Drummond won the election illegally.

Raymur v. McDowell

File consists of 9 documents: Judgement by Default; Affidavit of E. Johnson; Receipt for $147.90; (2) Affidavit of Judgment Creditor; Writ of Summons; Affidavit of Service; Plaintiff's Costs; Judgement Creditor's Costs. The Plaintiff claims $382.11 for debt and $15 for costs for goods sold and delivered to the Defendant. The Plaintiff recovered $410 in a judgement and he claims that the said judgment remains unsatisfied.

Jungerman v. Gerke

File consists of 3 documents: Affidavit of Jungerman; Order to Issue Writ of Capias; Writ of Summons. Plaintiff claims that the Defendant is indebted to him for $170 as payee on an unpaid promissory note.

The Right Reverend George Hills, Lord Bishop of British Columbia v. E. Cridge

File consists of one document: amended bill of complaint. Case regards the said E. Cridge, acting as Minister of the Church of Christ with no authority or license authorizing him to officiate and perform the offices of clergyman. Defendant refusing the acknowledge ecclesiastical law and failing to conform to the discipline and government of the Church.

Keffee v. Hart

File consists of 31 documents: (4) Affidavit of Keffee; Bill of Costs, (2) Answer to Interrogatories; (3) Writ of Summons; (3) Order to Hold to Bail; (2) Joint Affidavit of Hart and Bradley; Affidavit of Earle; Bail Piece; Affidavit of Marvin; Summons; Notice to Produce; Bail Bond; Summons, Order; Plaintiff costs on Dismissal of Summons; Record; Judgment; Record (Summons, Jury List, Particulars of Set Off). Case arising out of money payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff for goods sold and delivered, goods bargained and sold and for money received by the Defendant for the use of the Plaintiff and for money due to the Plaintiff on accounts between them and the Plaintiff claims $800.

Hart v. Keffee

File consists of two documents: (2) Affidavit to Hold to Bail. Plaintiff claims that the Defendant is truly indebted to him in the sum of $339.17 for payment on unpaid promissory notes. Keffee is master of the Schooner "Rose" and the case has something to do with this.

Williams v. Cohen et al

File consists of 9 documents: Order for Leave to Appear; (2) Writ of Summons; Affidavit of J.M. Roger; Affidavit of W. Hoffman; Affidavit of A. Hoffman; Affidavit of W.M. Drake: Writ of Summons; Affidavit of Service. The Plaintiff claims $1,156.24 principal interest due to him as payee on a promissory note. The Defendants are of the firm Cohen and Hoffman, Traders. Defendants Hoffman and Hoffman claim that the said Bill was not given in respect of any business or other transaction of the firm and therefore defend that they are not indebted to the Plaintiff for the said amount.

Barnard vs Beedy

Affidavit of F.J. Barnard in support of Caprias; Praecipe for Writ of Attachment.

-Plaintiff claims that the Defendant is justly and truly indebted to him for $3,972.11, that being the amount certified due to him by the Registrar of the Supreme Court as the amount owed on unpaid accounts. The Defendant has not paid the Plaintiff the amount certified to be due and he has since left the province.

Needham vs Brown

Writ of Summons; Affidavit of Service; Judgment by Default; Affidavit of W. Drake; Plaintiff's Costs.

-The Plaintiff claims $830.76 for debt and $12.50 for costs for an amount of rent due in respect of Saanich Hall farm as well as interest on arrears of rent.

Murphy vs. Katz

Bond; (2) Writ of Summons; Correspondence on case; Affidavit of T. Davie; Affidavit of T.G. Murphy; Affidavit of Katz; Defendant's Costs of Suit; Issue; Judges order

The Plaintiff claims $250 for debt and $15 for costs for services performed by him as an Attorney at Law and Solicitor on behalf of the Defendant at Washington territory in the United States and for work done for the Defendant at his request.

Choak vs. Roberts

Judgment.

-Plaintiff is claiming money payable to him by the Defendant for money lent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant and for money paid by the Plaintiff for the Defendant at his request, and the Plaintiff claims $100. On the other hand, the Defendant claims that he is not indebted to the Plaintiff, but that the Plaintiff is indebted to him for an amount equal to the Plaintiff's claim plus interest.

Roberts v. Choak

File consists of 21 documents: Exhibit "A"; Affidavit of Roberts; Affidavit of Grenell; Affidavit of Davie and Pawson; (2) correspondence; (4) Affidavit of Davie; Costs on Judgment; Order for Extension; Notice of Trial; Notice; Affidavit in Support of Summons to Set Aside Suggestions for Costs; Master's Certificate; Summons; Points Intended to be Insisted on Part of the Plaintiff, Writ; Statement of Defense; Statement of Claim. Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiff for S268.60 for money lent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant and on accounts stated between them. The Defendant claims that the Plaintiff is indebted to him for an equal amount.

Mason v. Bate

File consists of 4 documents: Affidavit of H.F. Heisterman; Affidavit of R. Plummer (with attached Exhibits A & B). Mason is the administrator of the estate of W. Rippon. Rippon was the owner of a piece of property, Section 20, Range IV, Mountain District, Vancouver Island. Upon his death, the property was to be sold at public action, authorized by Mason. Noah Shakespeare, acting as the agent of Mr. Bate and the Vancouver Coal Company, purchased the said property on their behalf. Bate then stated that Shakespeare has exceeded his instruction. It is presumed that Mason is suing for the purchase price of the property, 100 acres at $250 an acre, equaling $25,000.

In Regards to the Land Registry Act 1870 and Tax Sale Repeal Ordinance Amendment Act 1874

Affidavit of L. Lowenberg.

-Regarding the taxes due on Lots 656 and 657 in Victoria. Lowenberg states that he has paid the taxes due on the property. He has applied to the said Registrar General to cancel the charge against him for the taxes due and has produced the required receipts, but is having trouble clearing up the charge for various reasons.

Results 251 to 300 of 1933