ON NIGHT OF TORNADO

Taranaki Daily News, 7 November 1935, Page 11

ON NIGHT OF TORNADO

CYCLIST’S LEG FRACTURED ACCIDENT ON JUNCTION ROAD. CLAIM AGAINST MOTORIST. On the evening of the tornado at New Plymouth, May 17, 1934, a motor-cyclist was knocked over and injured as he was attending to a headlight blown out by the strong wind on Junction Road. His right leg was broken and he subsequently received a long period of hospital treatment The sequel was disclosed in the Supreme Court yesterday when the cyclist, Raymond Gamer Lander, took action against Harrison Ashworth Nodder and Clifford John Nodder (the motorist) for £5OO general and £124 4s special damages. After evidence for the claim had been led by Mr. L. Hughes Mr. L. M. Moss asked Mr. Justice Reed to withdraw the case from tire jury on the ground that there was no evidence that Nodder had caused the accident by his negligence. His Honour said he would decide this morning whether the case should go to the jury. x The jury . comprised Messrs. David Graham ‘ (foreman), Clive Veale, H. G. Wyatt, Hector Hogarth, W. W. Pickles, L. W. Hedges, C. D. Arnold, Herbert Billing, E. J. Hutchinson, F. L. Harding, H. J. McKain and T. A. Hamilton. Lander was employed as a gardener and chauffeur by Mr. C. H. Burgess at ■ the Meeting-of-the-Waters, explained Mr. Hughes. He left his work about 5.15 p.m. to ride home to Westown on his motor-cycle. , There was an exceedingly high wind and an acetylene head-lamp in good order was blown out three times. On the -'third occasion, on the straight piece of road near Mr. Hale’s property, Lander again dismounted to relight the lamp. Pulling the machine as far as he could to the left side of the road, he felt a bump as the wheels mounted the grass.. While he worked on the lamp his right leg was on the edge of the bitumen and his left on the grass. He detached an electric tail-light to assist him, so that for the time the cycle had no head or tail-light., , DRAGGED SOME DISTANCE., A moment later Lander was hit by Clifford Nodder, aged 16J years, who was driving a car from the Meeting-of-the-Waters. Lander was dragged for some distance, his right leg being broken in two places and his head being injured. He was taken to. the New Plymouth hospital. After six weeks the leg, owing to shortening, had to be broken again and set in plaster for eight months. He was ultimately discharged from hospital with his leg 75 per cent out of alignment and permanently shortened. Cross-examined by Mr. Moss, Lander admitted the night was one of the worst ever experienced at New Plymouth. He saw a car approaching from New Plymouth with good lights, but he did not see another approaching car in front of the first one. He was not aware that other cars had passed while he was attending to his cycle on the several occasions. He did not get off his machine on the two previous occasions, but sat astride the cycle with the engine stopped. He sat astride on the third occasion, too, his legs being on the ground. When he stopped both wheels were on the grass about six inches from the bitumen. He could not have pushed the cycle further over because the grass sloped towards the gutter;, the slope was steep enough to prevent a cycle being stood, up on it that night. Witness denied the correctness of the assertion in his statement to the police that an electric torch was fitted to the back of his machine. He had a lamp fitted on a bracket. It was covered with red silk. This lamp went out after he had removed it from the bracket. As far as he’ kne the police took no action against Nodder, who reported the accident. He could not say that his head was bumped several times on the road, but he could say he was dragged along the ground. He denied that he was at least two feet out on the bitumen. He denied having told Mrs. Campbell, who picked him up, that it was his fault and that he saw the car approaching. Neither, had he told Mrs. Nodder in the hospital that it was not her son’s fault. To His Honour: He did not know Nodder’s car was approaching. He did* not see the lights. He was not dazzled by the light of a car coming from the direction of New Plymouth. QUESTION OF INSURANCE. Witness denied that when he went to Nodder senr. about third party risk he suggested Nodder junr. might do something to help him get the insurance. Nodder did not say his son would have to speak the truth or remind witness that he had admitted' his fault in the matter. Nodder, when insurance was mentioned, had said Lander would have to prove negligence. Dr. G. F. Rich, medical superintendent at the New Plymouth hospital, described Lander’s injury. Lander now had full movements of the joints, but a shortening of the leg by about half an inch. He complained of abnormal pains in the foot, these having been confirmed as nerve pains. Witness had thought these pains would disappear, but he was now inclined to think they would be permanent. To Mr. Moss: The leg had made a good mend, but not a perfect mend anatomically or functionally. \ Victor C. Davies, nurseryman, Westown, spoke of Lander’s reliability as a motor-driver when employed by witness. Francis Wilfred Heal, motor-driver, who took charge of the cycle after the accident, also gave evidence, and William Laing, surveyor, produced a plan ,of the locality. Havelock Victor McCready, motor-service proprietor, New Plymouth, and Percival Robert Sheppard, law clerk gave evidence of’ tests made on the scene of the accident. Frederick Richardson, wood merchant, New Plymouth, testified concerning the condition of the cycle after the accident. Mr. Moss asked that at this stage the case should be withdrawn from the jury and judgment entered for Nodder. He submitted there was no evidence that negligence by Nodder caused the col- . lisiori. At most it had been proved that the accident occurred and that Lander was hurt; there were no facts from which negligence by Nodder could be legally inferred. To hold negligence on the case as it stood would at the most be a guess, not a legal inference. It was not a case in which the doctrine of “the matter speaks for itself” could be invoked, and the defendant held the plaintiff to strict proof of negligence. It was submitted that Lander could not point to negligence by Nodder or prove, even if there were negligence, that it was the cause of the accident. The case was so weak that it was one that should be withdrawn from the jury. Counsel asked for a verdict of contributory negligence aainst Lander. He had had the opportunity of choosing a place to attend to his cycle, and it was evident that he chose a dangerous place. Lander sat on his i -lighted motor-cycle on the highway in breach of a motor regulation. Had he not done this the accident could not have occurred. After Mr. Hughes had replied His Honour said he would decide to-morrow morning whether the case could proceed to the jury.