ANSWERS BY JURY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23203, 24 November 1938, Page 18

ANSWERS BY JURY

EFFECT TO BE ARGUED CASE FROM WHANGAREI SEVERAL POINTS RESERVED An inconclusive verdict, the legal effect of which has yet to be argued, was returned by the jury in the Supreme Court yesterday in the case in which George Brott, labourer, of Onerahi (Mr. Leary), claimed £975 damages from Robert Harold Allan, of Whangnrei, sijzmvriter (Mr, North and Mr. Trimmer). On July 5, lO.'Ki, while he was walking across Bank Street, Whangarei, Brott was struck by a car driven by Allan, and sustained injuries for which he claimed the damages. Each party ascribed the accident to the negligence of the other. The case was tried by Mr. Justice Fair,' who summed up yesterday morning after Mr. Lcary nad concluded his address. In answer to four issues submitted to them, the jury found that both defendant and plaintiff had been guilty of negligence materially contributing to the accident, and that defendant, notwithstanding plaintiff's negligence, could, by the exercise of reasonable care thereafter, have avoided the accident. Irrespective of these answers, and if plaintiff was entitled to recover, they awarded him £252 special and £375 general damages. Mr. Leary moved for judgment in accordance with the verdict. Mr. Trimmer asked that no judgment bo entered pending argument as to whether there was any room for the third issue, whether the verdict was against the weight of evidence, and on the non-suit point raised by Mr. North. He asked for 14 days in which to move for judgment or for a new trial. His Honor granted the extension of time applied for and reserved for further argument the motions for judgment, for non-suit and for a new trial.