ACTION FOR DAMAGES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2985, 31 May 1911, Page 70

ACTION FOR DAMAGES.

IZ\ T JURED IN A THEATRE

WELLINGTON, May 26. An incident at His Majesty's Theatre, Courtenay place, was investigated in the Supreme Court to-day. The case was heard by his Honor the Chief Justice and a jury of four.

Mrs Elizabeth Walsh attended the theatre one evening, and fell over in walking to a seat, and she claimed £ll4 10s as damages. The proprietors (Messrs Fuller and Sons) denied the plaintiffs statements, and said the lady did not look where she was going.

The plaintiff, a widoAV, who keeps a boarding-house, said that owing to the defendants not sufficiently lighting their theatre she suffered damage. Certain steps iu the passage from the door of the gallery to the side were dangerous and unsafe. On the evening of February 3 she was passing along the passage to occupy a seat at the side of the gallery, and did not see the steps, owing" to their being insufficiently lighted, and owing to her reliance on the directions of the defendants' servant she fell down the steps. She suffered great pain, had been prevented for six -weeks from attending to her occupation, and had incurred expenses foir assistance, for surgical and medical appliances. The steps were unguarded, and the firm's servant invited her to walk along the passage. A small bone in her left arm was broken and her left shoulder was d/llocated. She was still unable to raise her arm above her shoulder.

Negligence wars denied by the defendants, and they denied that the theatre was not sufficiently lighted or that the steps were rendered dangerous and unsafe. They denied that the plaintiff could not, and did not, see the steps. For an alternative defence the defendants said that the injuries were not caused by the matters complained of, but were occasioned by the plaintiff's own negligence. The steps were constantly used and plainly visible. The plaintiff did not look where she was going, and did not exercise ordinary care. Other persons were there wit&out injury. After hearing evidence the jury returned a verdict for the defendants "without retiring. Defendar.t's counsel then stated what he could not say before—that Messrs Fuller had always sympathised with the plaintiff, and had offered to pay her expenses.

His Honor: That is a very generous offer. It is perfectly plain to me that even without a light it is a person's duty to look out for steps. Costs on the lowest scale were allowed.