MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Evening Star, Issue 19552, 10 May 1927, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

TUESDAY .MAY 10. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) Judgment by default was given for ilaintiffs, with costs, in the following jases- ■ „ Jago, Biggs. Lti v. R. Taylor, £2 7s, balance of account; Dunedin Indusinal Co-operative Society (in liquidation) v. Margaret Hunter, £4 10s Id, account agreed upon; City Corporation v. Eric Lousier, £25 17s Bd, rates due; I. J. Etheridge v. M. J. Murphy (Baljlutha), £i 10s, account agreed upon; Evening Star Company’ v. W. G. Brown, £1 «s 4d, goods supplied; J. K. Marcussen v. Arthur Wood (MacanIrew’s Bay), £l6 17s 6_d, rent due; Llico Tudor v. E. S. Griffin (Ashburion), £2 16s, work done and materials rapplied; Mabel M’Dnff v. Thomas Stiven .Glenkemiicb), £2O, money lent; William Qmrk v. J. R. Moffatt (Christchurch), £ll 9s 9d, account igreed upon; Wright, Stephenson, and 9o;, Ltd. v. L. Beck (Morrisons), £2O 5s 10d, balance of account: Reddolls, Ltd v. William Thompson (Clinton), £6 ss, goods supplied; E. R. Skinner v. (. H. Stewart, £4, balance owing for rent; Andrew Lees. Ltd. v. Bruce Lawrence (Oamaru), £2 10s lid, goods supplied; same v. Cedric Crago Clark (Warrington), £5 9s 6d, goods supplied ; Hislop and Gibson v. Lonmer, £1 3s 6d, goods supplied; Coulls, Somerville, Wilkie, Ltd. v. S. M. Hovel (Waihi), 13s 2d, goods supplied; Recldells. Ltd. v. John Smith (Tahakopa), £6 11s, goods .applied; D.S.A. v L. Vautier ( Whakaronga, Palmerston North). 19s. costs. ■ On a judgment summons George Chooquee was ordered to pay £7 forthwith ,to John Henry Moulin, in default seven days’ imprisonment. MOTOR COLLISION CLAIM. Oswald H. Smith and Co. claimed from Fanny M'Atamney (1 atearoa) die sura of £35 12s, being £25 12s for repairs to car and £lo damages loss sustained by plaintiff through non-use oh car while under repair. The claim arose out of a collision near the JVJerton bridge between a car driven by William Young Campbell (plaintiffs employee) and a car driven by deiend&nt’s son. Tho statement of chum alleged that defendants car had been recklessly, negligently, and carelessly driven and managed. Mr G. T. Bayloc appeared for plaintiff and Air W u. Hay for defendant ' William Young Campbell, a traveller employed by the plaintiff company, said he was returning from Oamaru to Dnnedin on the day of tho Otago-Hawke s Bay football match. Approaching the old' wooden and narrow bridge at Merton there was a straight road, and a good view was obtainaole of the bridge in both directions. The slight rise on the northern approach had the effect of preventing a clear view as to whether another car was on the bridge or not. When on a level with the bridge he saw that a gig had tho bridge passage. His car was then travelling at twenty miles an hour. Ho pulled up, but before ho stopped the car at the back, driven by • defendant’s son. crashed into him. The driver at the rear could have seen he was pulling up if care were exercised. The collision took place on the bridge. (Vitness detailed the conversation with the defendant’s son. Witness denied that a horn had been Rounded, and had stated that it would be running a grave risk to give way to another car on tho bridge. The other driver- had offered “ a quid to square it up,” but witness replied that tho damage would be more than that, and he was not prepared to make a bargain for hi; firm. As a result of the accident his firm had suffered loss of business through losing the use of tho car. The Magistrate; You can’t claim for loss of business, although if you had hired another car you could have claimed. To Mr Hay; He did not notice that defendant’s car was damaged in any way. When he pulled up he did not skid‘the wheels of the car, and when the car stopped it was about two car lengths from the, beginning of the bridge. He did not put his hand put to warn anyono coming behind him that he was about to stop. Henry Hobson Didham, a billiard room employee, but formerly a farmer at Merton, said bis gig was halfway across the bridge when he noticed tho first car. travelling at an ordinary rate, a few yards off tho bridge, and the second car was 200yds back and travelling at a “ fairly fast bat.” Witness doubted if Campbell could have passed his gig. Campbell pulled up quickly. The defendant’s son had asked Campbell for £1 to settle tho damage to the mudguard. After the cross-examination Mr Hay said : “ You received a message from me asking you to call. Why didn’t you call?” Witness: It waj your duty to call on me. (Laughter.) Evidence of the damage to plaintiff s car was given by Dry-den Rowan, workshops manager. The lunch adjournment was taken.