Laserfiche WebLink
2 �a <br />200301800'', <br />IN THE COUNTY COURT OF HALL COUNTY, NEBRASKA DEC 122002 <br />LOYfELAHNDORP <br />E <br />GENERAL COLLECTION COMPANY, ) JOURNAL ENTRY <br />Plaintiff, ) <br />CASE NO. CI02 -836 <br />VS. ) <br />a , <br />R <br />ROJEAN FELDMAN, ) t <br />Defendant. ) <br />On the 5th day of September, 2002, the above - captioned <br />matter came on for trial to the Court. The plaintiff was <br />represented by its attorney Dick Gee and the defendant appeared <br />pro se. Evidence was adduced, arguments made, and thereafter the <br />Court took the matter under advisement. <br />Now on this 4th day of December, 2002, the Court finds all <br />as hereinafter set forth. <br />The instant matter involves a suit brought for lawn care <br />services which the defendant maintains were not done correctly. <br />While it is clear that the defendant was not happy with the <br />results that were obtained, the Court is not convinced that the <br />lawn care service was not properly applied. Unfortunately there <br />can be no guarantees as to the results that are going to be <br />obtained when dealing with the vagaries of Mother Nature. <br />Therefore, the Court finds judgment in favor of the <br />plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $709.22 <br />together with costs in the amount of $22.94 and attorney's fees <br />Lot 7 Scheel Subdivision <br />D <br />c <br />fm'f <br />c a <br />O <br />N <br />C <br />2 �a <br />200301800'', <br />IN THE COUNTY COURT OF HALL COUNTY, NEBRASKA DEC 122002 <br />LOYfELAHNDORP <br />E <br />GENERAL COLLECTION COMPANY, ) JOURNAL ENTRY <br />Plaintiff, ) <br />CASE NO. CI02 -836 <br />VS. ) <br />a , <br />R <br />ROJEAN FELDMAN, ) t <br />Defendant. ) <br />On the 5th day of September, 2002, the above - captioned <br />matter came on for trial to the Court. The plaintiff was <br />represented by its attorney Dick Gee and the defendant appeared <br />pro se. Evidence was adduced, arguments made, and thereafter the <br />Court took the matter under advisement. <br />Now on this 4th day of December, 2002, the Court finds all <br />as hereinafter set forth. <br />The instant matter involves a suit brought for lawn care <br />services which the defendant maintains were not done correctly. <br />While it is clear that the defendant was not happy with the <br />results that were obtained, the Court is not convinced that the <br />lawn care service was not properly applied. Unfortunately there <br />can be no guarantees as to the results that are going to be <br />obtained when dealing with the vagaries of Mother Nature. <br />Therefore, the Court finds judgment in favor of the <br />plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $709.22 <br />together with costs in the amount of $22.94 and attorney's fees <br />Lot 7 Scheel Subdivision <br />