DAMAGES CLAIMED

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 106, 7 May 1931, Page 5

DAMAGES CLAIMED

HUTT ROAD COLLISION

RAILWAYMAN SUED

Damages amounting to £926 10s were claimed against Clarence Douglas Hector Orr, railway employee, of Wellington, in the Supreme Court to-day, before Mr. Justice Blair and a jury, by Arthur George Humphrey, signwriter, of Lower Hutt, and his wife, Violet May Humphrey, as a result of a motor accident on the Hutt road last September. - .-■-'.■•

Mr. O. C. Mazeugarb appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. H. F. O'Leary, with Mr. W. P. Rollings, for the defendant!

It was set out in the statement of claim that ou 19th. September,' 1930, Mrs. Humphrey was riding on the Hutt road on a motor-cycle going in the direction of'Petonc. At the same time the defendant was driving a motor-car towards Wellington, and it was alleged that tho defendant so negligently and unskilfully managed and controlled the motor-car that if collided with the motorcycle, causing serious injuries to Mrs. Humphrey. The negligence alleged against the defendant was: (a) That he was travelling on the-wrong side, of tlic road; (b) tbat ho was travelling at an excessive speed;-(c) that lie failed to observe the plaintiff travelling in tho opposite direction; (d) that ho failed to steer clear of the motor-cycle; and (c) that he was driving the motorcar while in a state of intoxication.

As a result of the collision it was alleged that Mrs.' Humphrey suffered fractures of the pubic bone, laceration of her left leg, and shock, and was in hospital from the date of the aeeident until Bth December, 1930. She was still receiving medical attention, and had been advised that she would suffer permanent physical injury. Her clothing had been damaged in the collision, and on account of her injuries sho had been unable, to attend to household duties, domestic help having had to be employed. She claimed £73 2s 6d special damages, and £750 general damages. Arthur George Humphrey claimed £3 7s 6d as loss of wages for 0110 week, and £100 general damages, his claim with that of Mrs. Humphrey totalling £926 10s. : A statement of ! defence w-as liled denying the allegations that the collision and injuries to Mrs. Humphrey were due to negligence on tho part 01 Orr, but at tho commencement of the caso Mr. O'Leary said that liability was admitted, and .therefore, the only question for; the. Court was tlio assessment of damages.: The jury awarded.tho.plaintiffs jointly £109 7s 6d special damages; £750 general damages for Mrs.. Humphrey; £65.general and £3 ,7s 6d special damages for the husband., . ._ Judgment was entered for the plaintiffs in terms of the jury's award. .