OTIRA COACH ACCIDENT. (From Our Own Correspondent.)

Otago Witness, Issue 2784, 24 July 1907, Page 63

OTIRA COACH ACCIDENT. (From Our Own Correspondent.)

GKBYMOUTH, July 16v

The evidence for the defence in the actio& Scott v. Cassidy was a general denial 1 . Experts in evidence said that the coaches' were in good order, and that the drives was careful, and did not go down the hillr at too great a speed. The issues «übmittedf to the jury and answers thereto were aa 1 follow:— (1) Did the defendant, on the 4ttf of February, 1907, receive the plaintiff Catherine Maria Scott upon his coach as a"passenger for hire from Otira to Broke* River?— Yes. (2) Was the defendant*. coach capsized on such journey, and was the plaintiff thereby injured as set out in! the etatement of claim?— Yes. (3) Was thei said coach unsafely overloaded? — No. vW Was the said coach in such bad order «n<S condition as to be unsafe and to contribute to the accident?— Yes. (5) Was there anj^ defect in the coach to which the accident),, is attributable which was either known to: the defendant, his agents, or servants, oi* t which by the exercise of precaution or skilH Bright have ■become Icnovn to him of them?— No. (6) Was the said accidenti attributable to the want of skill or ta negligence on the part of the defendant's driver?— Yes. (7) Was the 6aid accident attributable to the. unsafe overloading?;— No. (8) What damages is the plaintiff! entitled to recover?— (a) £54- 2s general damages; <b) £45 18s special damages." Costs according to scale.