LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1933, 16 December 1913, Page 18

LAW REPORTS.

I I ..—♦ — . ! SUPREME COURT. FIRM SUED FOR £1500 DAMAGES. MOTOR-LORRY MISHAP. JURY AWARDS PLAINTIFF £400. A claim of £1500 for damages was made in tho Supremo Court yesterday against tho Drapery Importing Company | °f New Zealand, Ltd. Tho action arose I from a motor-lorry mishap, in Customhouse Quay on April 15, 1913, tho claimant being Philip Shannon, a man I of Go years, who had been employed "b.v the Harbour Board on the wharves for 25 years. Tho ground of tllo claim was that a servant of the D.I.C. ran a motor-lorry over Shannon through negligent and unskilful driving. The result had been that plaintiff had suffered great pain, had been permanently disabled, and would bo altogether prevented from attending to his occupation and earning his livelihood. The alleged negligence complained of was that the driver of tho lorry was on tho wrong sido of the road, was travelling at too great a spoed, and that ho had passed between tho tramway shelter-shed (near the wharf gates) and a waiting tramcar, yhilo Shannon and others were proceeding . from tho shelter-shed to . tho car. It- was alleged also that the lorry driver had failed to keep a proper lookout and to give warning of his approach. His Honour tho Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) was on the bench. Sir. T. A. Neave appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. T. C. A. Hislop for the defendant j company. A jury of twelve was empanelled. In giving an explanatory outline of the case, Mr. Xeave remarked that the wonder was that the old man had not been killed., Since tho accident he had done ■ no work, and would never again bo able to do any. The Plaintiff in the Box. Tho plaintiff stated that prior to tho accident ho had been in constant work ! at £2 10s. per week, but since the misi hap lie had been unable to make much ! use of his right arm. | To Sir. Hislop: Before making for the • tram" ho had looked about him in both directions. Ho had not tried for employment since the accident; trying was useless. Dr. Eraser, of the Public Hospital staff, stated that when Shannon entered the institution he was suffering a good deal from shock, from injury to his chest, two broken ribs, an injury to his right shoulder, and a small abrasion on tho right check. Afterwards lie do- ! voloped bronchitis, whi:h in witness's opinion was duo to tho injury to his I chest. When admitted to tho Hospital, i Shannon's condition was serious. Wit- : ness found no evidence'of rheumatism or heart trouble ill the patient, and, his heart was now bad, that might be through bronchitis. Dr. Tollnirst, who examined Shannon on December 13, stated that the plaintiff's condition was such a3 to render liim incapable, of doing any hard work. In any case, oil account of his a<;o, Shannon was reaching tho end of his working-days. Dr. Young also gave evidence. Francis M'Cann, Parliamentary messenger, who witnessed tho accident, said that tho lorry went by at about six or seven miles per hour. Ho heard no warning from tho lorry driver. The only alarm ho heard was the tram motorman's calling: "took out! Look out! Liok out!" Witness.and several ethers had to lift tho lorry off Shannon to extricate him. There was nothing to interrupt tho lorry driver's view of his course. His Honour: And nothing to prevent tho old man from seeing tho lorry corninn: if ho had looked up tho road. Witness: Providing tho lorry didn't come too quickly. Thomas Burke, stevedore, deposed that ho did not see the lorrv until it was on top of Shannon, and did not hear the lorrv give any warning. Cbaj-lcs Forbes, labourer, who was standing near tho Gpneral Post Office, said that ho saw tho lorry run along to ' the scene of tho accident, and did not hear any warning from it. At the time there were no expresses blocking the lorry from going oil tho other side of the tramcar. Char'ofl Ericson, hulk-keeper in the Stato Coal Department, who was sitting talking to Shannon just before the accident, stated, that no warning was given by tho lorry driver. Other Side of the Matter. This closed tho-evidenco for the plaintiff, and witnesses for the defendant company wero then placed in the box. Th'omiis Christopher Gollin, the drivel ofitlio lorry, stated that- ho sounded.his horn when' approaching the nlace wlioro the accident occurred. The course which he took was tho safest.- Ho had been motor driving constantly for two years, and intcruiittontlv for four yearsand a half. He entered the service of the D.I.C. about a week before tho ac- ■ oident, and on that particular morning tho car had just been landed from Christchurcli. Dr. Shand deposed that Shannon had had rheumatic, trouble for years, and that tho nccidcnt had probably, accentuated it. N Shannon also had an old heart trouble. ' Tho old man would probablv in any cass liavo been unablo to work over the ago of 70 years. Thomas Streighton, fish'' merchant, Newtown, stated that tho lorry driver sounded his horn and had nulled up just as 'he v struck Shannon. The lorry was being driven on tho best, and. at the same time, tho usual course. Victor Frederick Cook, tramway motorman, said that the space .occupied on the other side of the tram was taken ur> by expresses, and that the lorry could not have been taken through there. Jury Awards £(00. The issues his Honour put to the jury, and the jury's answers were:— Was the motor-van of tho defendants negligently managed, and was this neglect the cause of the accident to tho plaintiff?— Answer: "Yes." Was'tho plaintiff negligent in his crossing of the street, and did this negligence lead to tho accident? —■ "Yes." What damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover from tho defendants?—"£4oo."