JUDGE BRANDS IT IMPUDENT FRAUD.
Per Press Association WANGANUI, November 19. An interesting case, James Stuart v. Frank Iledgman, a claim for £1024 for moneys advanced, was concluded in the Supreme Court to-day' before Mr Justice Reed. Judgment, was entered for plaintiff for £S26 14s lid. with costs The Judge said that he C6uld ndt help remarking that it was an impuj dent fraud. j In evidence, it was shown that Hedgman acted as a sort of adviser for Stuart, and got him to send from time ! to time his earnings, stating that he would look after them for him. Stuart 1 could not get a statement of how his J affairs stood.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19261119.2.125
Bibliographic details
Star (Christchurch), Issue 18008, 19 November 1926, Page 9
Word Count
113JUDGE BRANDS IT IMPUDENT FRAUD. Star (Christchurch), Issue 18008, 19 November 1926, Page 9
Using This Item
Star Media Company Ltd is the copyright owner for the Star (Christchurch). You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Star Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.