Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CIVIL CLAIM

Echo of Collision Magistrate Reserves Decision The echo of a collision between a small car and a milk delivery van at the intersection of Sefton and Sarah Streets on October 18 last was heard in the Timaru Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr H. Morgan, S.M., when Alice M. Davies claimed £36 from the Ashburton Co-operative Dairy Factory Co., Ltd.

Mr G. J. Walker appeared for plaintiff and Mr W. H. Walton for defendant.

Mr Walker said that the claim arose out of a collision on October 18, 1938. The husband of the plaintiff was driving a car along Sefton Street, and when at the intersection of Sarah Street he observed a truck being driven up Sarah Street The speed of the truck was fast and Davies considered it his duty to pull up and give way to the truck. This he did, giving the truck driver 37 feet to go round him, The truck driver, however, continued on and collided with the smaller car, which was carried a considerable distance. The claim was for damages to the smaller car, and they based the claim on driving at an excessive speed, failing to exercise care and failing to exercise control over the lorry.

George Eric Davies, drapery manager, said that his wife, who was the plaintiff in the case, owned the car involved in the accident. On October 18 last he proceeded up Stafford Street, exercising care on account of there being a fair amount of traffic about at the time. He was about to cross the intersection of Sarah Street when he saw a lorry coming from his right up Sarah Street. The lorry appeared to be travelling too fast to allow witness to cross, so he pulled up. On observation afterwards he saw that he had stopped his car in nine feet. The car was at a standstill when the lorry struck it, lifting it bodily and carrying it across the road a distance of about 37 feet. Approaching the intersection his speed would have been slowing down from 20 miles an hour. The lorry driver accused witness of not giving way to the right, but witness pointed to the skid marks, which indicated that he had done all in his powei' to give way to the right. To Mr Walton: The lorry, when he first saw it, was about six feet down Sarah Street, while he himself would be almost level with the intersection. The lorry was well in to the left side of the road. He could not say what the speed of the lorry was, excepting that it was too fast.

Mr Walton: He says he was travelling at 25 miles an hour. Witness: I can’t say as to that. You say you were doing 20 miles an hour?—Yes, not more. I will bring evidence to show that you were going much faster than that. So fast, m fact, that you attracted the attention of someone on the footpath? —I must be a marvellous driver then to have done what I did. We will also bring evidence to show that the lorry had a governor on if and could not have done more than 30 miles an hour?—The driver told me about the governor at the time of the accident.

I put it to you that at a distance of 20 yards from the corner you get a clear view for some distance to the right down Sarah Street, in spite of the hedge being there?—When I approached the intersection there was no traffic coming either way. In evidence, Cecil W. Wood, jnr., said that tests had been made of a car of the same model as that driven by Davies and at 20 miles an hour the car was pulled up in 23 feet, as against 40 feet set out in the Government regulations If the stopping distance was less, then the speed would be less. Constable K. Clark produced a plan of the scene and gave evidence of measurements he had taken. Evidence for Defence Opening for the defence, Mr Walton said that the driver of the lorry claimed that the cause of the accident was the excessive speed of plaintiff’s car when it approached the intersection.

William Thomas Wedderell, the driver of the milk van, said that he drove up Sarah Street and as he approached the intersection he looked to the right and saw nothing. There was nothing coming towards him but when he looked to the left Davies’s car shot right in front of him. The van would not do more than 30 miles an hour in top gear because it was governed down. He approached the intersection at an estimated speed of 20 to 22 miles, an hour. He had just changed from second to top gear. Davies’s car had not stopped when it was struck and when witness first saw him Davies was travelling at a fast pace. Witness applied his brakes as soon as he saw the other car.

Replying to Mr Walker witness said that he had been licensed to drive five or sir months before the accident. He was satisfied that he took every care when approaching the intersection.

Mr Walker: Do you know anything about giving way to the right?—Yes. Well how would you have pulled up to give way to a car coming on the right if it takes 40 feet to pull up at 20 miles an hour? —I would have pulled up.

Mr Walker: And. there would have been a similar collision. How do you account for carrying the other' car 37 feet if you were doing 22 miles an hour and had braked?—l do not say that I braked when I struck Davies. I was thrown on to the steering wheel. Joseph Askey, who was walking on a footpath in Sefton Street, 40 yards from the scene of the accident, said that Davies’s car passed him and was going too fast in that area. The car had only just passed him when witness saw the van coming on to the intersection. Both vehicles appeared to reach the intersection at the same time. If Davies had been looking' out it would have been possible for him to have stopped before crossing the intersection. The Magistrate reserved his decision CONSTIPATION I.6DY SUFFERER PRAISES DR MORSE’S INDIAN ROOT TILLS Mrs T. J. Mear, 28 Domett Street Port Ahuriri, Napier, writes:—“l have usee Dr Morse’s Indian Root Pills as a remedy for Constipation and found there act effectively and without ill effects, consequently I can recommend their use to any similar sufferers.”

NEURITIS DISCOMFORT AND TORTURE Mrs Perry, of Masterton, states: * suffered all the agony and slecplc .nc at night through neuritis, but R.U.I completely removed every pain.” I’t R.U.R. yourself - what it has done h others it can achieve lor yon -R.U.I with money back guarantee, lor rhen matism, lumbago, sciatica, neuritis an gout. Procurable from !•:. J. I'hompsoi Timaru; A. N. Hancock, Temuka; B. / Bryan, Waimate; Morris Williams, Gei aldine; and other chemists

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THD19390330.2.95

Bibliographic details

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21308, 30 March 1939, Page 9

Word Count
1,171

CIVIL CLAIM Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21308, 30 March 1939, Page 9

CIVIL CLAIM Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21308, 30 March 1939, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert