NEGLIGENCE NOT PROVED

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21983, 14 December 1934, Page 17

NEGLIGENCE NOT PROVED

CLAIM FOR £7OO DAMAGES MOTHER'S CASE REJECTED A sequel to a fatal collision near an intersection in the city on February 7 was heard in the Supreme Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Reed. Margaret Frances Keefe. of Auckland (MA Sullivan), sought to recover from William Frederick Costello. taxi owner, and Ivan "James Costello. taxi driver, both of Grey Lynn (Mr. Richmond), damages amounting, to £7OO for the death of her son. Thomas Victor Keefe, a messenger boy, aged 15 years. It was alleged that the lad was riding a cycle down-Upper Hepburn Street and that Ivan James Costello negligently drove a car down Wellington Street, with the result that the boy was seriously injured. He died in tne Auckland Hospital on February 9. The defence was a general denial of negligence and it was further stated that, it any negligence occurred, it was on the part of the boy. Before the hearing of argument the Court was adjourned while His Honor, viewed the scene or the accident. , Plaintiff said in evidence that sne .was dependent upon deceased. Gwendoline Lister said she was "ding in the taxicab involved. She asked the driver to drive slowly. Another passenger in the car was being taken to hospital. The driver said "Look at this. She saw the* boy coming down Hepburn Street. The driver kept going but turned to his left. He appeared to go a little quicker, because it seemed the hoy was going to the back of the car. She did not see the collision, but she heard it. Her impression was that the car stopped. Tt might have gone on a bit. Cross-examined, witness said the boy was coming down Hepburn Street very fast, with his head down. After further witnesses had been heard Mr Sullivan, in addressing the ,Court, submitted that the driver of the taxi should have stopped when he saw the boy travelling at a fast speed. He saw the danger and called a passenger's attention to it. By not stopping he placed the boy in peril. "I have tried dozens of these cases find never had a weaker one." said His Honor, who did not hear witnesses for the defence. Judgment was given lor . defendant, with costs. The question of an appeal was raised by Mr. Sullivan, His Honor remarking that counsel would have the statutory period in which to appeal.