HomeMy WebLinkAbout0741 ~sx~o ;
~ lto ~?+~^~~c
s~, wc~E ~ou~~i ~ .
110GlIi ~0?1R~S
6LERK t~~~~U~t C011~t ~ II~1 •i1iF, CIVII, llIVISIOy OF
qE+:ARD Yt~~~~E[?~ ~
~ ' COUNIY COURT IN AND POR
- ~ S(O ~S ~~~3 ~ SAINT LUCIE COUNIY, FI.ORIUA
2628'70 CASE NO. 73-203-~P-Ol
WILLIAM 8. TBSCHNER, DllS )
Plainti[f
1 -
-vs-
)
r1kS . FRc1NC IS SLOAN
Defendant )
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
O R D E R
In each and every case the plaintiff has the burden of proof, There
was an initial contract. It is disputed whether or not the contract contained
relining of the teeth after the initial shrinkage of the gums. The defendant
had this work done and has charge~. Immediately she objected, No statement
on account was received. 1fie question remains as to whether this was
included in the initial contract. It cannot be established by hearsay
evidence. +Jherefore, it is ~pon
CONSIDERATION, O.~EKED and AllJUllGED that the plaintiff shall go hence
~ri~hout day and take nothing by tMs cause,
ll0\`E ANll URDEREll in Chambess at Fort Pierce, Florida, this ~ day
of , 1973 ,
~ ~
: ~
j ,~iti ~
~ `tJ`l . . .
~ :;a _ ~ r~i! /
~ ~c ~ • ~ ~ - : '~IILLLAM G. TYE, County Judge
~ - . ° - .f,'
_ ..X ~ ~i _ _
_ , :
~t - -
. - : . 1
. . _r~~ ~ _ . ~
..J.i~~.~~.~~``~
~ •
i. .
- -
- - -
~ -
~
~
;r -
~
~
~
,
~
-
~
~ $11C1( ~O PA~f
~
~
~
~
~
~,g~ ,4,_
~x
~ ~
~ `~2
_ . ~ _ .s.- 4`e"-6
"~-.~_.~~'~"~-~r ';w . _ . ~ ~ ~