MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22293, 20 June 1934, Page 5

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Tuesday, June 19,' (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment was given . for plaintiffs, with costs, in the following undefended cases;—A. D. Edgar v. Florence M. Marks (Glenorchy) claim £3 11s for professional services, with costs (25s fid) ; M’Leod Bros., Ltd., v. Thomas Frethey (Hastings) claim £3 Os 4d for gpods supplied, with costs (23s 6d). RESERVED JUDGMENT GIVEN, The magistrate gave his reserved decision in the case in. which .William Roger Owens, of Kaitangata, ah infant, by his next friend, Henry Owens, of Kaitangata, miner, claimed from Andrew Nelson, of Brighton, farmer, the sum of £6O for general damages and £2O 4s special damages for injuries received in a motor car collision on the Main South road on March 6, 1933.—Mr C. J. L. • White appeared for the plaintiff andwMr G. B. P. Wilson for the defendant. —The magistrate said that he had previously inquired into the circumstances of the collision in which defendant’s car was involved in an action by the driver of the other car, when the latter was nonsuited. The present action was one by a passenger in the former plaintiff’s car, to which different considerations applied, as the present plaintiff was not identified with any negligence of his driver. Much fullel- evidence was adduced as regards the dazzling effects of motor car lights, and the evidence was also more- precise in some other particulars. The defendant’s statement to the constable two hours after the accident was at variance with his evidence. Ho had stated that he was confused When he made his statement, but it was to be noted that it was made a considerable time after the accident, which threw considerable doubt on his evidence as given at the hearing. The defendant was an old man, over, 80 years of age, and was not used to driving at night, and, in the opinion of the court, was not sufficiently competent to deal with what was an ordinary incident or hazard of night driving. The defendant must answer for his own want of care and skill, and judgment would accordingly be. entered for the plaintiff for special damages of £l6 5s (loss of wages £5, clothing £5, and hospital expenses £6). The sum of £6O was claimed as general damages. The plaintiff had a noticeable scar on the left side of his face which would tend to become less permanent. He also complained of frequent headaches, as a result of which, he said, he had to give up his. work in the mine, which involved lifting weights. Dr Newlands had said that a condition of headache following concussion was well known, and should gradually lessen, and perhaps ultimately disappear. The court considered the amount claimed (£6O). was reasonable, and judgment for £76 5s and costs would be given.