CIVIL SITTINGS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 239, 2 July 1908, Page 2

CIVIL SITTINGS.

CLAIM FOR £1000 DAMACES. DR. FAULKE v. CITY CORPORATION. VERDICT FOR THE DEFENDANTS. The hearing of the case of Dr. Faulke v. the City Corporation was continued yesterday beforo Mr. Justice Dcnnistou.'and a common jury of eleven. . . ~.. ,7 , 1 The facts of. the case, were'briefly 'as follow:—Plaintiff was proceeding in his motor car to a privato hospital in Brougham Street via Courtonay Place and Kent Torrace.; Ho turned iuto_ Kent Torrace on the ■ inside of a Kilbirnie car bound in the same .direction. When he saw that his progress was blocked by an advancing' Newtown car ho endeavoured to got ' clear by stopping and then crossing behind the Kilbirnie car. The Newtown car, however, came, into collision, with his motor car, and as' a result he sustained rupture of the fibres of muscles near • the; right. elbow, and his motoi - car was damaged. ■" Plaintiff .therefore claimed £1000 damages. " ' Mr. Gray (with him Mr. Wilford) appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, and Mr. Skerrctt,. K.C. (with him Mr. O'Shea) for the defendant Corporation. Counsel addressed the jury at considerable length. His Honour, in summing up, said that damages could only be .given if a negligent act had, been committed by a servant of defendants. The question was whether the motorman of the Newtown car did . all lie could reasonably be expected to do to avoid a collision. It had been ; suggested by counsel for defendants, that plaintiff had, by want of proper treatment, aggravated a comparatively minor injury into a more serious one. His Honour thought that.there was a good deal of weight'in this observation of counsel. After . reading extracts from his notes of the evidence, his Honour left, the case tp the jury, remarking that the -question was one entirely .of fact to be determined according to the. commoiisense of tho jury. ' ' , The jury, which retired .at 1.35, returned at 3.20,.. with a verdict for tho defendant Corporation.. ■' : Mr. Skerrott moved for judgment for defendant Corporation. Ho also applied for certificate for two, extra days and for second counsel. ■'Mr.' Gray asked that stay of execution should bo granted if he gavo. notice of application for new trial within seven days. His Honour: On what ground ? Mr. Gray: That. the verdict was against the weight of evidence.' . Mr. Skorrett: We don't object. His : Honour entered up judgment in the following terms Judgment for defendant Corporation with costs as per scale,, witnesses' oxpenses and disbursements, and allowance for two extra days and _ second counsel; execution to bo stayed if applcation for new trial be made within seven days. , . The Court then adjourned until 10 o'clock this' moaning. 1