A DISSATISFIED PUPIL
CLAIM AGAINST HAIRDRESSER. ALLEGED BREACH OF AGREEMENT. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. Further evidence was given to-day for the defence in the case in which Mabel Burton claimed the return of £50 deposit and £98 for loss of wages against Donnelly and Sons, hair specialists, in respect of their alleged failure to teach her in terms of agreement to become a hair specialist. An employee of the firm, named Andrews, testified to demonstrating various processes to plaintiff, whom, at the end of three months, he considered proficient in all the branches of hairdressing that he had taught her. He denied making any statement to the contrary at any time. A witness named Douglas, who was described as another pupil, said he thought plaintiff had received proper instruction.
Mr. E. Page, S.M., announced that he would give a decision at a later date.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19261021.2.95
Bibliographic details
Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 250, 21 October 1926, Page 11
Word Count
146A DISSATISFIED PUPIL Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 250, 21 October 1926, Page 11
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.