HomeMy WebLinkAbout0511 ~ 9
. ~
29t?41`7 ~
IN 1~1E CIVIL DIVI.SION OF
COU~11Y COU~T IN AtiD 1rOR ~
SAINT LUC IE COU~ITY, FLORIDiA
CASE N0. 74-323-SP-Ol -WRONG NUMBER
73-323-SP-O1
CARROLL G. ALI.Bti
Plaintiff
~
-va- ~~~jSC1E COUNT~~IA. .
ROCER Pa1TRAs
Defandant CLEFK CIRCUIt COURT ~1 +
RFC04~ VE°IfIEO~..~..ti: ~
SaZV 9 ~sAN'T~I '
0 R D 8 !t ~~Q~`9
Plaintiff was an iadspandent drivsr for North Aaerican Van
Liaea. He delivarsd ~ portion of ths houa~hold goods bslonging to tt?s
dafsndant. Btcause th~ other portion of the housahold goods wsre ~ot
dclivered until another date, defsnda~t stopped paroent on hia psraonal .
check to the plaintiff. In no way did the dafanda~t aho~ that the
plaintiff vaa negligent or responaibla for the lata delivery of the
~erchandise. If a cauae of action axista, it exiata b~twean tha aecond
driver or North Aasrican Van Lines and the dafendant Arthur I~larc„a. It ia
therefore,
~ pRDgRgp ANp ApJl~GBD that tha plaintiff do have and rscover
1 of and fros the dafendant ths ais of $679.65 plua the cost of thia action.
~
~ DO~iB AND ORDBBBD in Chaa~bera in Fort Pisres, Florida, this
~ 28th day of Augwt, A.D., 1974.
~ ~
- ~ ' COl~T1R JUDGB.
: - • - '
. _ . . _ ~ ~9f~~1'7
_ . _ , e . . - - ~p AMO REC~RQE~ ~
- . WCIE COUN Y f
~ _ - ~ ROCEii POITlIA3
~ CtERK C~~CIltT COi1Rt -
~ RECOR~ vE~;f1E0
~
~
~ A~c Z9 i l OS A!i't~l
~
~
~ THIS CASE TO BE RE-RECORDED DUE TO CASE NtJMBER BEING A 73 CASE NOT 74.
~ -
~
~t~(~~ f~ a~l~
~
~ QR
~ 60DK PALE ~~7~ ,
- - - ~.~t
~
``"X _ .z.< : ' i•~ `:ys~~~':~
x
~ra -.f ~ _
~ y ~
' _ . ~_"~S.'~~`,~.d ~ `5 . .,°~..`r.°L . . _ . . %