APPEAL COURT.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 121, 14 July 1911, Page 5

APPEAL COURT.

SAMSON V. AITCHESON. (Per Press Association.) Wellington, July 13. The Court sat to hear the appeal case Samson v. Aitcheson, an appeal from the judgment, of Sir Joshua Williams. The facts are: The appellant Samson was the owner of a motor car and was negotiating for its sale to a widow, but had arrived at no final agreement for its sale. The intending purchaser and her son wished for a trial before purchasing. A trial was arranged, and while the sen was driving the car, respondent (plaintiff in the Court below), who was riding a bicycle, was run over and injured. Evidence was given in the Court below (though denied by the appellant) that the appellant, who was in the car, gave the son instructions in the management of the car. In the Suprenic Court the Judge directed the jury that appellant was liable if the jury found that the driver (the sou) was negligent. The jury found a verdict of negligence and assessed damages at £750. On this verdict, Samson moved for judgment on the grounds that up-m the evidence ho was entitled to ludgraent. He also moved for a new trial on the grounds that the Judge misdirected the jury. This motion was dismissed 1 y Sir Joshua Williams, and hoia this decision I. hi present appeal was brought. Messrs Adams and Hay, of Dunedin, appeared for appellant, and Mr Chapman, K.C., and Mr Hanlon for the respondent.