CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 32, 7 February 1935, Page 6

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

MOTORISTS AT VARIANCE COLLISION AT INTERSECTION. COURT RESERVES DECISION. As a result of an accident which occurred al the intersection of Godwin Crescent and Purnell Street on Alarch 16, 1934, Charles Champness Leigh, painter, of Mosston, claimed £74 J9s 4d general damages and £95 16s special damages from Eric, Robert Furlong, clerk, of Wanganui, and his wife, Alexa Forlong, at the Wagist rate's Court at Wanganui yesterday. Air. J. 11. Salmon, S.AI., presided, and after hearing the evidence called by both slides, decided to inspect, the place of collision and to reserve his decision. The statement of claim set out that plaintiff had been driving a motor-cycle along Purnell Street and came into collision with defendant's car, owned by Mrs. Forlong and driven by defendant, when it was proceeding along Godwin Crescent. If was alleged that defendant failed to give way to the motor-cycle, did not observe the righthand rule, that he was driving at an excessive speed, and that he failed to keep a proper look-out when approaching the intersection. The injuries suffered, by plaintiff caused him to be an inmate at the Wanganui Public Hospital from March 16 until April 5. After being discharged he had to undergo treatment costing him £l7 3s. He was unable to work for 14 weeks, and was only able to work half time for the following five weeks. , Mr. B. C. Haggitt represented plain I iff, and Air. J. Hussey appeared for defendant. Air. R. Carruthers was associated. with Air. Hussey. Afr. Hufsey, for the defence, claimed that the evidence in support of the claim was not sufficient, to establish it. He pointed out that a. charge brought against defendant in the Magistrate’s Court, alleging that, he had made a breach of the right-hand rule, had been dismissed. He claimed that if plaintiff had looked to his loft he would have seen defendant’s car and could have avoided the accident. Evidence was given by Dr. A. D. Nelson, medical superintendent at the Wanganui Public Hospital, as to the in ■juries suffered by plaintiff; by Mr. E. A. Alarchant, who produced a plan of the locality; and by Air. Gordon Lind say, who gave evidence as to the damage done to the motor cycle. Plaintiff’s Evidence. Plaintiff, in evidence, said lip left Moss ton to travel to the city by way of Fox Road, Fitzherbert Avenue and Purnell Street. Approaching the Pur-, nell Street interesection with Godwin Crescent, he was travelling at about 15 m.p.h. ou the left-hand side of the road about a yard away from the grass track. When he arrived at the intersection, he glanced to the right up Jackson Street, which appeared to be clear. He then :aw a car approaching him slightly to his left. Tn an attempt, to avoid the ear, he swerved to the right because there would have been a collision had he kept moving straight on. His next recollection was when he woke up in hospital a fortnight later. Cross-examined, plaintiff said he had given evidence in the Afa gist rate’s Court in connection with a charge ’against defendant. Mr. Hussey: Do you remember what vou said? Defendant: Tf is a long time ago. Alr. Hussey: Do you recollect saying vou did not remember what happened on Afarch 16?- - Very likely. I did not recollect it then. T was very ill at the time. Did you say in the Magistrate’s Court that you did not look to your left?--No, T am quite sure 1 did not say that. Did yon say you naturally watched voiir right hand side because fast traffic camo from that side in the morning?—No. Didn’t you say you did not see the car until the moment of impact?—l do not remember saying that either. Is it not a fact that, at the hearing of this charge against Forlong on May 7, you did not know anything about the accident?—T answered the questions put to me and that is all T can remember. You say now you can give a detailed report of what, happened on March 16? —That is your opinion. T put it to yon that you have thought this matter out. from your regular practice when coming to town, hut you don’t remember anything about the accident? No, I remember it. I put it to you that yon are giving your evidence according to what you do hy habit.—That is your opinion. Constable H. Sargeant gave evidence regarding marks noted on the road at the. intersection after the accident. Point of Impact. Cross examined ho recalled that in the ATagistrate’s Court he had said it was difficult to locate the exact point, of impact. Plaintiff could remember nothing about the. accident, when interviewed. Examination of the enr revealed that it; had been struck on the extreme right, end. Tf his measurements were correct as to the centre point, of the intersection, a. gouge mark showed that plaintiff was 11 feet on his wrong side of the road. Re-examined, witness said he had interviewed plaintiff a month after the accident, f’laijitiff had been in bed at the time. Sydney Fyler. a pain I er. said that while walking in Jackson Street on the morning of Alarch 16, he, saw a car drive out of Godwin Crescent, a. about 25 m.p.h.—an excessive speed for such a dangerous crossing. He heard a collision. but saw no motor bicycle prior to seeing the car. He saw a man tossed in the air. Cross-examined, he said he could not see the motor cycle because of a. bank and the car, which was on the inter sect ion. Ronald McGregor, a roadman, said

ho was working a block away from I'm n. II Street. A motor-eyele passed him travelling at a slow pace in the middle of the road. He saw the driver tossed into the air later. Erie Robert Forloug, defendant, said he was proceeding from Godwin Crescent to Purnell and Jackson Streets, driving at a reasonable speed, of which he, could give no estimate, lie slowed up at the intersection and saw a motorcycle some distance up Purnell Street There appeared to be no possibility of a collision, so he continued on his route. Witness was driving on the lefthand side, of the road. Afte driving over the intersection, he looked sidewavs and saw the cycle driving directly at. the rear portion of the car. The 'motor-cycle was not dragged in any way, and witness heard rather than felt the impact. He was keeping a proper look-out and denied that the gouge mark referred to by the constable was the point, of impact. There were no marks on the road. Cross-examined, witness said he did not change his speed when crossing the intersection. Witness denied that, he was late in getting to work and was driving fast to get, there on time. Roadman’s Evidence. David Ruscoft, a roadman, said he had been working near McGregor at Selwyn Crescent corner, which was adjacent to Godwin Crescent, and about four chains away. .He saw a motor-cyclist travelling at about 20 rn.p.h. on the wrong sid* of the road to the extent of about 6ft. 6in. The cyclist continued on the same Bide ot the road until he reached the corner of Godwin Crescent, when he swerved to the. right and straightened up again. Then he struck the back of a motorcar and was thrown on to the side of the road. The motorcar was on the left hand side of Jackson Street. The motor-cyclist crossed the intersection very much on his wrong side. The motor ear was not. travelling fast, and had the cyclist continued without swerving, he would not have struck the car. The gouge mark indicated by the constable was not the point of impact. Mr. Haggitt: You saw all this from a distance of four chains? Witness: Yes. Mr. Haggitt: And you aould even tell that the motor-car was on its correct side'? —Yes. McGregor says that the cycle was in the middle of the road. He is wrong? —Absolutely wrong. Did the cycle skid when it. straightened up?—-No. If the cycle had not swerved, would if have gone, behind the car?—Yes. ! Mr. Haggitt submitted that Roscoe’s

evidence was unreliable. Ruscoe slated he was four chains away from the scene of the accident, that he was watching plaintiff all the way, and could also say on which side of the road defendant’s car was driving. Mr. Haggitt submitted that had plaintiff continued straight on instead of swerving, he would have struck the car in the middle. As it was he swerved, had to travel a further dis tanep, and even then struck the rear of the car.