RUDD v. BELL.
{To the Editor of the Evening Star.) Sir, — In this case, 1 desire it to be understood that the plaintiff did not sue for L4O, but in the alternative, for either the redelivery of the goods, or their value of L4O, and for 40s detention, judgment being given in his favor. But, since the trial, the defendant very properly delivered up the goods in so far satisfaction of the judgment, thereby leaving merely the 40s damages, and costs, unsatislied. Thus the verdict was not given after or notwithstanding the delivery of the goods ; nor was the defendant liable to the L4O after such delivery ; neither was 40s all, but as above stated, the plaintiff was entitled by the verdict, A. H. Rem
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18691005.2.13.1
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2002, 5 October 1869, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
125RUDD v. BELL. Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2002, 5 October 1869, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in