£2276 DAMAGES

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 258, 28 July 1936, Page 2

£2276 DAMAGES

Claim Against Hastings Dentist Succeeds YOUNG MAN’S INJURIES IN MOTOR ACCIDENT Damages totalling £2276/1/7 were awarded David Bett, a 23-year-old salesman. of AVellington, in the Supreme Court, AVellington, yesterday, in a case which arose as a sequel to a motor accident on Easter Saturday last, as a result of which plaintiff received severe injuries, including the loss of his right eye. Defendant in the case was Moss Wylie, a Hustings dentist. .Air. Justice Smith was ou rhe Dench. The full amount claimed was £4500 general damages and £76/1/7 special damages. The defence admitted liability and offered no evidence, the question for the jury’s consideration therefore, being the assessment of the quantum of damages. The jury retired for three-quarters of an hour before arriving at its verdict. It was emphasised in evidence for plaintiff that as a result of the head injuries he received he would be unable in future to follow the occupation which he was following before the accident, that of a wallpaper salesman aud interior decorator. -Aledical evidence proved that the use of plaintiff’s remaining eye industrially was the bare minimum. Plaintiff was represented by Mr. O. C. Mazengarb, with him Air. L. K. Wilson, and defendant by Mr. G. G. AVatson, with him Mr. AV. P. Sharland. In his statement of claim plaintiff said that on April 11 last he was a passenger in a car being driven on the main Hastings-Napier highway by A. G. Perry, now deceased. Defendant so negligently and unskilfully managed his car on the same highway that he brought it into violent collision with the car in which the plaintiff was a passenger, carrying it off the roadway and through a fence. It was alleged by plaintiff that the negligence of defendant consisted in driving in a state of intoxication, travelling at an exces-' sive speed, failing to keep to the correct side of the road and failing to steer clear of the car in which plaintiff was travelling. As a result of the collision, continued the claim, plaintiff had received severe head and facial injuries necessitating the removal of his right eye. He was now totally disabled and might never again be able to obtain employment, or earn money, and he would continue to suffer pain. He claimed general damages amounting to £4500, and special damages totalling £76/1/7. Defendant in his statement admitted the collision and that it was due to his negligence and that he was accordingly liable to pay damages for injuries suffered by plaintiff as a result o£ the collision.

Opening the case, Mr. Mazengarb said defendant admitted his liability to pay damages and the matter, therefore, came before the jury as an appropriate tribunal to decide on the amount of damages which should be paid to plaintiff. As a result of the accident plaintiff had been unconscious for live days, having received very severe and grievous injuries to his head. But tlie more grievous injury was to his right eye which it was found necessary to remove on his admission to the AVellington Hospital. The eye which he lost was the stronger of the two, plaintiff having defective vision with the remaining eye.

Dr. W. H. Simpson, medical practitioner, AVellington, said that plaintiff had come under his care for treatment to his eyes. The coats of the right eye had been split by the impact and that had made vision practically nil. The visual power of the remaining eye was lost He could see at 3ft. what a person with normal eyesight could see at 60ft. By the use of a strong lens he could see at 6fk what a normal eye could see at 24ft. If there was any change in the remaining eye it would be in the direction of deterioration.

Plaintiff, in evidence, said that the last recollection he had before the accident was having lunch in the Alanawatu Gorge on Easter Saturday. He regained consciousness in the Napier Hospital on the following Thursday. Later he was taken to the Wellington Hospital, where his right eye was removed. Before the accident he was employed in the sale of wall papers, but with the condition of his vision now it was impossible for him to follow that occupation.

Evidence was also given by Dr. P. D. Cameron, radiologist, Dr. E. L. Marshall, eye specialist, Sir. M. D. MacGoun, dental prosthetist specialist, Air. A. V. Ashton, manager of the wallpaper department of Alpssrs. Smith and Smith, Ltd., and Mr. C. Gostelow, Government actuary.

No evidence was called for the defence. Air. Watson told the jurors that their task would lie a comparatively simple one because the defence had come forward and admitted its liability. But he asked that the jury should approach the matter uninfluenced by emotion or sympathy. Their task was really to give him such sum as financially would put him in the same position as if he had not been involved in the accident.