£927 DAMAGES

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 188, 7 May 1931, Page 2

£927 DAMAGES

Sequel to Collision

MOTOR-CYCLIST INJURED

A total of £927/15/- damages was awarded Arthur Getfrge Humphrey, signwriter, of Lower Hutt, and Violet May Humphrey, his wife (Mr. A. C. Mazengarb), by a jury in the Supreme Court yesterday. They proceeded againstj Clarence Hector Douglas Orr (Mr. O'Leary and Mr. Rollings), claiming damages for injuries received in a collision with a car driven by defendant. In the/statement of claim the plaintiffs said that on September 19, 1930, Violet May Humphrey had been riding a motorcycle along the Hutt Road from Wellington to Petone and the defendant had been driving his motor-car in the opposite direction. It was alleged that the defendant so negligently drove his car that it collided with the motor-cycle. This negligence was classified under five heads: (1) That he drove on the wrong side of the road; (2) excessive speed; (3) failing to observe the plaintiff travelling in the opposite direction; (4) failing to steer clear of the motor-cycle; (5) driving while in a state of intoxication. As a result of the accident, plaintiff received severe injuries, necessitating her treatment in hospital until December 8. She was still receiving medical attention and had been advised that she ivould suffer permanent physical injury. She had been unable to attend to her household duties and had had to employ domestic help. Under the heading special damages, plaintiff claimed £46/16/- as hospital and .medical expenses; taxis, £2; help in house, £l6/4/-; damage to clothing, £8 2/6—a total of £73/2/6. She also claimed £750 general damages. The other plaintiff, Arthur George Humphrey, claimed £3/7/6, loss of one week’s wages, and £lOO general damages. The total claim came to £926/10/6. The defence consisted of a general denial of all allegations concerning negligence, but when the case opened Mr. O’Leary admitted liability. The only question for the court was the assessment of damages. After considerable evidence had been heard, the jury returned with a verdict in favour of the plaintiffs and assessed the damages as follows: —Special damages, jointly, £lO9/7/6; general damages to Violet May Humphrey, £759; special damages to Arthur George Humphrey, £3/7/6; general damages. to the snmc plaintiff, £65. The total assessment amounted to £927/15/-, and judgment was given accordingly.