£2000 CLAIM.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 114, 17 May 1933, Page 8

£2000 CLAIM.

STREET ACCIDENT. PLAINTIFF CROSS-EXAMINED. REFERENCE TO PERJURY CASE Arising out of an accident in Symonds Street on February 23 of last' year, a claim for £IGS 1,7/U special damages and £2000 general damages was heard before Mr. Justice Smith and a jury at the Supreme Court this morning, Th,e plaintiff was Michael Walter Karews, bus driver, Morningside, and the defendant A. S. Holton, lorry driver, Duke Street, off Dominion Road, Mr. W. Schramm appeared for-, plaintiff,, and Messrs. A. H. Johnstono and J. F. Dick-i-on for the defendant. Plaintiff asserted that the , defendant, Holton, negligently drove, Iris motor truck and knocked him down. Injuries suffered by plaintiff were a fracture of tho left upper jaw, fracture of. the left collarbone, and fracture of the bone under the left eyebrow and the left cheekbone. As a result he had been in hospital six weeks, from February 2:j, 3932, to April 12, 1932, and his. left eye. was now' almost useless. The defence admitted that defendant drove the motor truck, but denied negligence on his part. If there was negligence, the plaintiff was responsible, or contributed to .it; in that he failed to keep a proper lookout, and failed to use due care and caution prior to. running or steppuigfinto; or colliding with the truck. Dr. A. Eisdell Mooro said that although plaintiff still had one small spot of vision in his injured left eye, witness considered it was rather a handicap than an asset. The sight of the eye could bo regarded as a complete loss.'

To Mr. Johnetone: Except for the lose of sight of the left eye, Karewa was to-day substantially as good a man ae he was before the accident. Plaintiff's Evidence. Plaintiff, in evidence, said that on February 23, 1932, he drove a taxi car down Symonds Street. It was about one o'clock in the afternoon, and he pulled the car up just below City Eoad corner, and less than a foot from the kerbing. Before pulling iir against the kerb he put his hand out as the signal ho was going to stop, and looking, in tho mirror in tho car saw the lorry about 60 yards away. : He had a second look to see if there was any other moving traffic about, and, seeing none, opened the car door and stepped out, standing at tho eido of the car waiting for the truck to poes. It seemed to swerve in as, though to park ,behind witness' car. Than it seemed to straighten up, and as it was so close witness went to etep on to his car. He just put the right foot on to tho step and was struck by tho truck. From the "kerb to the .centre of the road was about 2Sft, and the taxi witness, drove took up but -sft 3in, leaving about 23ft of roadway for the lorry to pass. . He was working as a taxi-driver at tho time, and considered his earnings would have been £3 a week. Ho was claiming £130 for loss of wages. Tβ Mr. Johnstone: He was familiar ■witE traffic conditions in Auckland. When le was in the car and saw the lorry it was travelling elowly. _ The reason he did not walk across the road when he got out. of the car was that ho heard a, ticking noise and thought one of the cars parked behind his might be starting. Apart from his own evidence there was no evidence of an eyewitness* ; 'f. Mr. Johnstone: Do you know a man named Cheadle ?—Yes. : ■ Prior to the last trial arising but of this accident you and he were considering going into a cartage contract?—He wanted to come in with me, And yon and he Went to Sanfords to see about some carting.?— Yes. Cheadle gave evidence that he was , walking tip Symonde Street and saw ,the accfilent?—^Yes. And as a matter of fact ho was miles away at the time?— Yes. Was he in the hospital at tho same time, and in the same ward as you?— Yes. ■ • ' Did J© discuss the accident with you? —No. . •. You swear that? —He came to me after he was allowed tip in the ward and eaid to ine, "I saw you bowled over." How did he get all the particulars of the accident?—l don't know. Do you remember a man named Bayly T—No. Yon swear that?— Yes, not by name. But you know he was in court at the previous trial when you got the verdict? — know Mm by name.

Promise to Pay Denied. How much did you promise to pay Cheadlo?—Nothing. Didn't you promise to pay him £25 ? — I did not. After the trial didn't you, Cheadle and Bayly go to the Thistle Hotel?— No. Did Detective-Sergeant Doyle invite you to make a statement, oral or written?— Yes. Did you refuse to make one?— No. You know he was anxious to get information regarding a charge of perjury?— Yes. And you and Cheadle were friends? — Not bosom friends. "Why didn't you malce a statement?— I did; I told him everything I knew. Did you sign anything?— No. "What did he ask you?—lf I knew Gheadle, and I told Tiim "yes." What else did ho ask you?—lf I had discussed the case with him, and I told him "no." To his Honors There was no partnership between, himself and Cheadle. The negotiations with Sanford were prior to any action being brought. Mr. Johnstone: Why did Cheadle come here and give evidence that he saw the accident?—l couldn't tell you. He told me he Baw it. And you know he didn^t?—l know now. WelL where did he get the particulars from?—l don't know. You knew what he wag going to say in evidence?—l did not. His Honor: Do you say you didn't know the evidence he was going to give?—l did not discuss the evidence with him. Mr. Johnstonet Can you suggest why this man, Cheadle, should come to Court and give substantially the same evidence as you about the accident? —No. I can't. "Wo Contract." X : put ft to you that there was a contract between you and Bayly whereby he "wae to finance the action and v get a third of whatever the verdict might be?— There was not. I don't know Bayly. Don't know him? —Not that I -know of. I might know him, by eight.'

' Further questioned by Mr. Johnetone, tho witness said that he had at different times received money from his mother and father. Between the time of the accident and the commencement of the action he had received about £G0 from his parents. He had received other money from his parents which he had lived on. Mr. Johnstone: How did you finance the action ? Mr. Schramm objected to anything being said as to what took place between, the plaintiff and his counsel. The witness said that he financed the action with the money received from his parents. Mr.•.Johnstone: You didn't care what Cheadle said '! — No. Why?—l didn't know what he was going to say. It didn't matter to you?— No. But it mattered to Jairn? — Apparently it did. Yes, because he is now doing three years for what he said? —Yes. How do you account for the fact that Detect've-Sergeant Doyle did not obtain a statement from you? —He didn't ask for it. Havo you got any fresh eye-witnesses to-day ?--No. Re-examined by Mr. Schramm witness said Cheadle was not a bosom pal o£ his. He did not lciiow Cheadle prior to zoing. to the hj-'iiual. and when Chuar'.le spoke to him, lio (Witness) was a very dek man. Suited in the Air. Ralph White, taxi proprietor, said on February i.< o.! last year he ar.d hi* brother hr»d th«'ir car parked behind that of Karevs In Syniouds Strt-ot. Witness heard a nois<e and then saw a «i an (Karewe) hurled hi tie air. The truck pulled up "ibcut four lengths ahead of Karews' car. The truck had an overhang of about a foot. The street was very quiet at the time and, except for a traincar coming up, there was no traffic about. Witness did not sec the accident at all. (Proceeding*)