land should be charged in favour of the plaintiff and all other creditors of the husband to the extent of moneys of RoBISON, the husband alleged to have been paid in the purchase of, or for the benefit of the title to, or for improvements or additions to, the property; and also held against the plaintiff's claim that certain policies insuring the life of the husband, and payable to his wife, should be charged in favour of the creditors of the husband with the amount of premiums paid thereon with interest.
After hearing argument, the Court retired for consideration of the case, and, on returning to the Bench, dismissed the appeal with costs.
J. P. MacGregor K.C. for the appellant.
.
D. L. McCarthy K.C. for the respondent.
LARRY
LESTER
CUTHBERTSON
*Oct. 26.
SUING BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, HUGH W.
CUTHBERTSON, AND THE SAID HUGH
APPELLANTS; W. CUTHBERTSON (PLAINTIFFS)..
AND
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY
OF LETHBRIDGE (DEFENDANT)
RESPONDENT. ON APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ALBERTA
Negligence-Evidence-Finding of negligence by jury--Sufficiency of evidenc.e to justify finding-Sufficiency of corroboration. The judgment of the Appellate Division, Alta., [1928]
1 W.W.R. 815, which reversed the judgment at trial on the findings of a jury, and held that plaintiffs were not entitled to recover damages for injury to the infant plaintiff, who was run over by defendant's street car, on the ground of want of the requisite corroboration of the evidence given by infant witnesses not under oath, to show that the accident was caused by negligence of defendant's motorman, was set aside, and the judgment at trial was restored, the Court holding that, apart altogether from the question of corroboration, there was sufficient in the evidence of the motorman himself, under the circumstances, to justify *PRESENT:-Anglin C.J.C. and Newcombe, Rinfret, Lamont and Smith JJ.