CLAIM FOR £5000

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 106, 1 November 1939, Page 12

CLAIM FOR £5000

ACTION BY WIDOW

FATAL MOTOR ACCIDENT

THREE DEFENDANTS

Damages totalling £5035 Is 6d were claimed before a jury. of twelve in the Supreme Court today by Mrs. Bernardine Maud Roach, of Otaki, on behalf of herself and her eight infant children.' The claim arose from the 1 death of her husband, who was- a carIpenter, as the result of injuries he received when a car in which he was a passenger collided with another car on the main highway near Te Horo last March. There were three defendants, Daniel George "Fraser, licensee of the New Central Hotel, Petone, in . whose car Roach was a passenger, Ronald Graeme Guy, a rental car'proprietor, of Hastings, who was the owner of the other car, and Whiu Carroll, a farmer, of Hastings, who was driving Guy's car. Mr. Justice Johnston . presided. Mr. O. C. Mazengarb and Mr. C. F. .Atmore (Otaki) appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. H. F. O'Leary, K.C., and Mr. E. Parry for Fraser, and Mr. G. G. G. Watson and Mr. W. P. • Shorland-for Guy and Carroll In her statement of claim Mrs. Roach said that at the time' 'of ' his death her husband was 57. years.old and she was 33. There- were eight children, whose ages ranged from one to 14 years, by the marriage; , On the evening of March 27, 1939, continued the' statement of claim 'Mr. Roach was a passenger in a. car driven and owned by Fraser, which was;proceeding north along the - main highway between Wellington' and Otaki. At the same time a car owned by-Guy and driven, by .Carroll was travelling . on the same road towards Wellington. Approximately two miles south , of. Te Horo Fraser and Carroll, -or ;one- of them, it was alleged* so negligently drove that there was a collision' between the two cars and Mr;-. Roach received injuries which caused his .death on March 29. - x • , The negligence alleged by :the. statement of claim against Fraser was^that he drove on the wrong" side, .of 'the road, travelled at an "excessive speed, failed to keep a proper look-out, failed to steer clear of the other "car, failed to apply the brakes in Sufficient time to avoid a collision, -and' failed to exercise proper control, of his .'car. - Guy, it was alleged, was negligent in bailing to keep his car in a safe condition and . equipped with proper lamps and in failing to have the headlights properly, focused and adjusted. Against Carroll the negligence .•al- ~ leged was that he drove the car in; an unsafe condition, failed to show sufficient lights on it. failed to have - the lights properly focused or adjusted, extinguished the offside headlampwithout displaying any light in-'the - offside side lamp, failed to prevent his lights from dazzling approaching ' drivers, and failed to exercise due care and skill. • • STATEMENTS OF DEFENCE. , Fraser's statement of defence admitted "the accident but denied negligence, and said that the.accident:, ; w;as ~ caused entirely by tbe- ; negblig_enqe A pf , either Guy or Carroll"..or,:both. Guy in his statement' of defence admitted the collision and ownership of ■_•• v the car but said that the cause of the." ' accident was ths negligence of Fraser...... He denied the allegations against..- .- him. ■ '. '.: , In his statement of defence Carroll . admitted'hiring the car from Guy and that a collision occurred. He said that v the cause of the collision was the ; negligence of Fraser and he denied the allegations against him. Mr. Mazengarb explained that Mr. Fraser had picked up Mr.. Roach at Waikanae to .take him to a , meeting of racing club stewards at Otaki.,... - Evidience is -being heard today and is expected to "continue tomorrow. X