In a recent legal proceeding at the King’s Bench, before the justices, an application to appoint a receiver in the case of Murphy v. Roche was heard. The case revolved around an action for £900, which was money lent. Judgment was granted for that amount, and the matter came to light during last September’s summons for leave to issue execution. The debt originated from a mortgage on lands in Mollinamudda, Co. Cork.
The courtroom drama unfolded as Mr McCarthy Mahony, instructed by Messrs. O’Connolly And Donnelly, represented the plaintiff. He informed the court that since the adjournment, stock had been sold, and a significant portion of the debt remained outstanding. Seeking swift resolution, Mr Fitz, the auctioneer, now requested an order for a receiver over the money in Mr Boyle’s hands and leave to issue execution generally.
However, Mr Scaly, instructed by Mr John. J. Power of Kilmallock, represented the defendant, highlighting a crucial aspect of the case. He pointed out that the defendant, a major in the Army serving in the trenches in France, was unable to execute legal documents due to his situation.
Addressing the court, Mr Justice Boyd acknowledged the defendant’s circumstances but emphasised that his property in Ireland was not in the trenches. He also referenced the words of Mr Justice Hargrave Deane from a similar case in England, suggesting that it was not fair to prosecute men who were fighting to defend the liberties of the country.
Mr Scaly further argued that there were more urgent cases, citing instances where maintenance was sought, which warranted immediate attention. He highlighted the defendant’s willingness to cooperate and find a resolution.
In response, Mr Justice Boyd proposed an order with certain conditions. The defendant would undertake to pay the debt on the 1st of July and again six months later. Additionally, arrangements were made for the lands to be leased for grazing, with the proceeds to be used to pay off the debt.
Ultimately, the courtroom drama concluded with the court’s decision to issue the order on the terms mentioned, ensuring a resolution that considered both parties’ circumstances and obligations.
