A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Southland Times, Issue 22948, 22 July 1936, Page 7

A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Boy As Plaintiff injuries in accident As the result of an accident when the bus he was travelling in from Invercargill to Tuatapere collided north of Pukemaori with a lorry, Peter Sim (Mr K. Dalgleish), claimed m the Magistrate’s Court yesterday £64 special damages and £430 general damages from J. Heenan, the owner and driver of the bus, and D. T. King, the owner of the lorry. Mr W. H. Freeman, S.M., presided. Mr B. W. Hewat appeared for the defendant Heenan ana Mr Eustace Russell for the defendant King. , T , Mr Dalgleish said that on November 30, 1934, the plaintiff, at that time a pupil of the Southland Technical College, aged 14, was a passenger in a bus driven and owned by the defendant Heenan when it collided with a lorry owned by the defendant King, near Pukemaori. As a result of the accident plaintiff had suffered a fractured thigh. He had been 14 weeks in the Riverton Hospital. The fracture had been healed by October when the plaintiff had been examined by Dr. A. Owen-Johnston and Dr. R. H. Hogg on behalf of the defendants King and Heenan. In February of the present year plaintiff had been taken to Dunedin where he had been examined .by Dr. White, who expressed the opinion that he would suffer no serious after effects as a result of the accident. Plaintiff had been unable to complete the school year and for the first two terms of the following year he had been almost completely incapacitated. By September of 1935 he had been able to do light work about his father s farm. From the month of December on he had been able to do a man s work on the farm. Plaintiff’s Evidence.

The plaintiff, Peter Sim, gave evidence to the effect that he had left the Riverton Hospital on March 8, 1935. At that time he could not walk very well —for three months he needed the aid of two crutches. For the next two months he had used only one crutch, after which time he had been able to get about with the aid of a walking stick. In September he had first begun to do light work about the farm, but it was not till the end of the year that he had been able td do heavy work. He had been in a very weak condition when he came out of the hospital. His leg troubled him now only when he did vigorous exercise. Questioned by Mr Russell as to why, if he was perfectly well in October, he had not endeavoured to do ordinary farm work from then on, plaintiff replied that he had felt well enough to do only light work. In answer to a question by Mr Hewat, plaintiff replied that he had boarded in town during the week and returned to his home in the week-ends. He had completed almost a year at the college when the accident occurred. At that time he had had no knowledge of what he was going to do in after life. He was not in a fit state to return to school after the May holidays. He had considered going back to school in the last term, but had thought it not worth while, although he had been well enough at the time. Edward Kempthorne Sim, father of the plaintiff, gave evidence in respect to the claim for special damages. After some discussion counsel for the defendants agreed to the full payment of the special damages claimed.

No Permanent Disability.

Mr Russell said that it was evident from the report of Dr. White that plaintiff would suffer no permanent disability. Dr. Hogg, in his report, had also said that the injury had mended well and that the slight shortening of the leg would cause no permanent disability. There was ample evidence of a good heal. Dr. Owen-Johnston said that he had been medical superintendent of the Southland Hospital for eleven years and during that time he had had a great deal of experience of fractured bones. He had examined the plaintiff and considered that the fracture had made a remarkably good heal He would have expected a boy of that age to have had the active use of his limbs after five months. He was of the opinion that the plaintiff would suffer no permanent disability. Questioned by Mi' Dalgleish, witness said that he differed from Dr. White in the opinion he expressed as to the amount of money that should be paid for permanent disability, namely, £lOO. After four months it was possible to estimate whether the disability was likely to be permanent or not. Mr Dalgleish said that they held by Dr. White’s statement that restitution should be made. No amount of damages would actually compensate the plaintiff for the shortening of the limb. He said that passengers while travelling along public roads had every reason to expect a safe conveyance. Drivers should be made to pay for their carelessness. Mr Russell and Mi' Hewat contended that the evidence showed no general disability and that the amount claimed was out of all proportion to the injury and suffering incurred. The Magistrate reserved his decision.