AN IMPUDENT FRAUD
CLAIM FOR MONEY ADVANCED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wanganui, Nov. 19. An interesting case, James Stuart v. Frank Hedgeman, a claim for £1024 for moneys advanced from time to time to s bo looked after by Hedgeman, was eon- , eluded in the Supreme Court to-day before Mr. Justice Reed. Judgment was ’ entered for plaintiff for £826 14s lid, ' with costs. The Judge said that he could not help remarking that it was an impudent ’ fraud. In the evidence it was shown ’ that Hedgeman acted as a sort of adJ viser for Stuart and got him to send ( from time to time his earnings, stating that he would look after them for him. Stuart could not get a statement of how , his affairs stood.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19261122.2.116
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, 22 November 1926, Page 13
Word count
Tapeke kupu
125AN IMPUDENT FRAUD Taranaki Daily News, 22 November 1926, Page 13
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. 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 Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in