HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966 tr
IN 1HB CIVIL llIVISION OF
iZrE)S~BS COUNIY COURT IN AND FOR
SAINT LUCIB COUNIY, FLORID~A
CASB N0. 73-695-SP-Ol
.
CHARI,ES J. HOPPSR, DDS )
Plaintiff
) ~
-va-
~
CLYDB HISSONG
Defendaat )
)
0 R D B R
lhis cause came on to be henrd before this Court vithouC the intervention
of a jury. The defendant's wife vas to have received treatment by the plaintiff.
When the treatment Wae inaffectual and further treatment was required the
defeadant`a Wife requested pulling the tooth. The plaintiff refuaed and the
defendant's Wife went elaevhere for treatment.
When a bill Waa rendered it was obviously disputed. Some services were
perfo~ed based upon an ~greemtnt betxeen the dentist and patient. Neither
party at the time of trial had personal knoWledge of the agreement. Since
the plaintiff has the burdon of proof and cannot establish except by
hearsay evidence, he fails and ahould go hence without day and take nothing by
~ this cauae.
'
; da of
, DONB and ORUSRSU in Chambera in Fort Pierce, Florida, this y
t
;
; October, A.D., 1913.
r
~
~
~ ~
~
_ ~
~ ,.."`r`:; :t~ COIJNT'Y JiJDGB
~ . , , r'~ "~i; .
~ , , f •
~ 'i' . ~ • _
. , • _ ' . _
~ - , !~2i'- - . fIIEU A~It P.tCORDE
~ ' ' - ST.IUC~E COUTiT`l ft~. ;
a ~ ' ROCEr. PO~t~AS . ~
" - • ' ' CLERR C;~CU~? COURT ~
~ . ~ . ~ pcc~+p~ vEp,~tiED
OCI IT 9 38 AN'~3
z
I
r~ 26~88~
~ .
~
.
;y:
~ aooK 2~9 ~c~ ~
-
~ . .._,1 _ _ _
'
Ct _ ~ ' _ _
r
. 2. r .vr
. s a
~.T Y"._~ . .