(PStt PKEBS AHBOUIATION.) Oamaru, Boptember 13. The oaae of A. D. Wells v MoOallum and Co., claim £1000 for wrongful dismissal, hoe been before the Sapreme Coart for two days and was oonduded to-night. The plaintiff had been engaged for 2$ years, and atee betog m tbe service of defendants for a short time was dismissed 00. the groand of Inoompotenoy, and of taking a letter of his employee's out of the tfficie and showing it to » solicitor. Counsel for the defenne con. tended that on these grounds the defendants were justified In dismissing, but oounsel for plaintiff argued that defendants knew of plaintiff's inoompetency before engaging him, and tbat *io position ha oooapied In the firm entitled him to take the lotter and show U to a solicitor, who happened to be the firm'a solicitor. The Judge summed up greatly m favor of plaintiff, and the jury awarded £234 damages which carried OOBtfl.
Permanent link to this item
SUPREME COURT., Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2226, 14 September 1889
SUPREME COURT. Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2226, 14 September 1889
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.