MOTOR COLLISION AT OTAKI.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 12 August 1925, Page 3

MOTOR COLLISION AT OTAKI.

SUPREME COURT ACTION

The hearing took place at the Supreme Court, Palmerston North on Friday, before His Honour Sir Robert Stout, of a case in which John Stocker Robinson, of Olaki, farmer, claimed from A.ikur John Robinson, of J?araparuuaiu, butcher, the sum of £2OO as damages arising out of a collision between a motor car and a horse and trap. Mr. Atmore appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Cooper for defendant. The following w-as the jury; Messrs G. H. Trott (foreman), A. G. Baldwin, H. Bird and W. G. Herron. The statement of claim set out that, on the main road near the Otaki railway on March 7, 1925, defendant, while in an allegedly intoxicated condition, drove a motor car so recklessly, negligently and unskilfully that he collided w-ith a horse and trap ow-ned and driven by plaintiff, by reason whereof plaintiff suffered personal injuries and much pain and suffering and the trap w-as damaged; wherefore plaintiff claimed the sum of £IBO as damages. As a further and separate cause of action plaintiff asserted that, as a result of the said negligent and unskilful driving, plaintiff’s wife was thrown out of the trap and suffered personal injury, whereby plaintiff w-as deprived of her domestic services for ten w-eeks. Plaintiff therefore claimed the additional sum of £2O for the loss of the domestic serViccs of his wife, being w-ages (including keep) paid to a domestic employee for ten w-ceks at £2 per w-eek. The statement of defence denied that the collision was in any w-ay due to any negligence on the part of defendant, and denied that the plaintiff was in any way injured as a result of such collision, or otherwise suffered any damage. The collision, it w-as asserted, was caused by the negligence of plaintiff in the driving and management of his horse and trap, and was due to inevitable accident. It was denied that, a,t a result of the collision, plaintiff ’s wife suffered injury or that plaintiff was deprived of his wife’s domestic services as alleged in the statement of claim. PLAINTIFF’S CASE. After counsel had outlined the statement of claim, plaintiff gave evidence that the accident had occurcd at about 7-15 in the evening. Defendant’s car, \,hcn first noticed, was on its wrong side of the road and, after narrowly avoiding a collision w-ith another car, trashed into the trap, which at the time of the impact was on its correct side, one w-hcol being oh the grass. Both oe cupants of the trap w-crc thrown out, and witness found his wife unconscious. Goth shafts of the trap w-ere broken off. Plaintiff spoke to defendant, who was apparently under the influence oi liquor, and who made no effort to assist witness or his w-ife. Plaintiff started I. walk over to w-here his wife was lying, but collapsed on the w-ay. Next morning defendant called to see witness, who had sustained severe injuries, including a split elbow, and offered to pay for all damage, provided that witness did not push the matter. Defendant had said that he w-as “dopey” at ihe time of the accident, and would, M>ttle the payment of damage later, but l-.o had not done this. After the issue i f the writ, defendant had stated that l.e was prepared to pay £2O in cash and | a further £2O at some future date. Wit- j i.-css was still receiving treatment for his injuries. Dr. Sharp, formerly of Otaki, gave -evidence regarding the injuries su»tained'by plaintiff. A fragment of bone •/.•a s still loose in the elbow- joint, and would always be so, while there was also at present shoulder, incapacity, though whether this would be permanent or not witness was unable to say. after the accident, was suffering from | shock, and was in a semi-conscious con- j dition. Ten w-ocks was a fair estimate j of the time she w-ould be unable to pel- j form domestic duties. Witness was pro-! •ent the day after the collision, when defendant had admitted to plaintiff • L h;;t he was in a “dopey” condition, and had offered to pay all expenses arising out of the accident. . ' Grace Mowbray, masseuse, carrying on business at Waikanao, deposed that she had been massaging plaintiff’s arm and shoulder joint since the accident. There w-as at the present time very imited movement of the affected arm. | Alice Maud Robinson, wife of plaintiff. gave corroborative evidence regard-j ing the collision. The gig had been currying good lights at tho time. Constable Sathcrley, stationed at Olaki, deposed thai, shortly after 8 o’clock on March 7th, he had received advice of the accident. Witness had found defendant in a drunken state, and had arrested him. He was later bailed out. Defendant w-as completely unable to remember anything about the accident. Next morning he had come to the police station and had said that his mind was a blank, as he must luivc been drunk at the time. Defondmt gave witness to understand that he would pay all expenses arising out of tiro accident. The following morning defendant had been charged an the court with drunkenness. Other evidence was given by Duncr-i Wilson, William Wnaka, Leonard James Kilmistcr and Hugh McDonald, and ■his closed the case for plaintiff. Mr. Cooper intimated that ho did not propose to call evidence. Mr. Atmore, addressing the jury, said the fact that evidence was not being called for the defence showed that plaintiff’s claim was justified. In his address, Mr. Cooper said that defendant admitted liability. The case would never have come to court if plaintiff had been as frank about the matter as defendant who, the morning after the accident had offered to pay all reasonable expenses. He hud been prepared all along to settle on reasonable lines, and at one stage .had offered £lO. The claim for £2OO wa s extravagant, there being items that w-ere utterly unreasonable. . Summing up, his Honour said that the only question the jury had to decide was the amount of compensation to be paid plaintiff. VERDICT FOR £lls. The jury retired at 12-40 o’clock, and returned at 1.5 with a verdict for plaini iff for the sum of £lls. Judgment was entered accordingly, with costs according to scale, and witnesses expenses estimated at approximately £4O.