HomeMy WebLinkAbout1734 i . YCi~E COUN~Rf~
~CER P01TIU` ~
CLEAx titl:CUlT COUIIT ~~g ~IVn, DIVISION OF
R~~ORp YER~iIED' ,
Cal1NTY COURT IN AND FOR
~ IT IO iT ~~1~ SAINT LOCIS COUNTY, FLORID~A ~
f
S
CASB N0. 74-201-SP-O1 ~
t
. ~823$4
TS1tItY HOWARD
Plaintiff
-vs -
JSAN DU1tAND
Def enda~t
0 R D B R
During the time of trial, the Court requested a~d was advised by the
~£c~~~e~~ t}~~~~ f~~•~ish the ~ame and address of their accountant.
Such has not been done. 1'he Court considers, at this time, that this is an
admission that the money is still due, owing and unpaid. This factor com-
bined with the testimony and other tangible evidence leads the Court to
conclude that, in fact, the plaintiff should prevail. Therefore, it is
D~gggp pND pDJUDGED that the plaintiff do have and recover of and
- rc~~~_nn~ .,t„A
from the defendant the sum o= ~even iiunur~.. r~i•.~ .-r=•--_~ .T. a_ -
the cost of this actinn in the amount of Twenty Three Dollars and 50/100
($23.50) for all of which let execution issue.
DpriE AND ORUERED in Chambers in Fort Pierce, Florida, this ~ daY ~
~ of May, A.U., 1974:
!
I _
~
~:.~::!~~~y"~~~'`~ ' .
4.1 3:`~.
~ ~JM K-'ri. - .
I -,{''..*s'es'.~~-'~~`~`.i~'' ~~t,_ ~G '!i~+:;~; COUNTY JUDGB
. ~w ~
. ~ . L~ . r =
~ i Yu ~
~~r.~Y~. ~~3'~['-:~ .I' r ' f
:~~J''~ • r " _~Sf.~q ~ r~ ' ' t
.F+`aY.:~ ~ L > _ ~
~;~.'a~:' f., ~ i;~~.,. , _ .
.'l1~+ ~ ~~•`•`~i~'~` . ~
. w
~~~~_~,'r.~`
.t~,~Tr =P~' i~"sQ': ~ . , .
~ J _ I~Y~~~:~~ ~ ~ ' -
~ rs' ~ 'F,
..+~•,~t ; ~1 ~'~•M,. =:i ,i ' _ - . ~
. ~~~f-
.L.J~(~~~ti=•
_ ~-iJ'' .~~{i~~lti{~t
,r~ :
~
~
~
~
E c ~ PaGE1
I~ ~
- ;...:~w.~., _ _
~ - ~ . _ - _
~ { ~ -