SUPREME COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 15 March 1926, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

■ y -rfl? g SITTINGS AT HOKITIKA. MONDAY. MARCH 15th. His Honour took his scat at 10.10 a.in. UNDEFENDED DEBT. State Advances Department v. Amos \V. Dowell claim for £2BB 11s and interest £33 17s Gd. Mr Sellers for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff by default with costs. AN APPEAL. Joseph Radomski v . William J. Haseler, an appeal against the decision of Mr Meldrum, S.M.

Mr Murdoch for appellant, Mr Pilkington for respondent. Mr Murdoch suggested that in view of the Magistrate’s notes not being sufficiently ample, as was agreed by Justice Reed at a recent sitting, that an order be made for further evidence to be taken by this court. The whole of the evidence is incomplete. In view of the fact that some of the respondents witnesses were not available, he thought that tlie evidence of these witnesses could be taken by affidavit. Mr Pilkington agreed that the notes were incomplete and somewhat indefinite, but he thought they were sufficient for the appeal, and sufficient to show what the Magistrate had decided the ease on. The question of hearing further evidence was entirely a privilege to hear further evidence. The case, continued Mr Pilkington, hangs entirely on whether there was a partnership or not, which the respondent has at all times denied to exist. After considerable discussion llis Honour agreed to hear argument by counsel in the afternoon. AN APPEAL. Michael Treaev v. Mary Xoanu*. an appeal from the decision of Mr H. P. Eawry, S.M., in declaring appellant was the father of the child of the respondent. Mr Joyce appeared for the appellant and Mr Murdoch for respondent. It was agreed that the hearing take the> form of a. rehearing, and Mr Murdoch proceeded to call evidence. On the application of Mr Murdoch the public wore excluded from tbe Court during the hearing. The Court adjourned at 1 p.m. till 2 p.m. AFTKRNOON SITTINC. In the Radomski—Haseler appeal His Honour decided to adjourn the hearing until the June sittings when a rehearing should take place. \\ ilnessos not available to be allowed to supply affidavits, such affidavits to be filed and served within one month. His Honour said lie did not consider it advisable to hear argument at This sitting as there may ibe another Judge present in June. Counsel agreed to tbe suggestions made and the case was accordingly adjourned till tbe June sittings.

SATURDAY. -MARCH 13. His Honor took bis seat at 10.20 a.m. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. James Kiletilkm v. "William Scarlo, Edward Searie and James Searle, claim for £(>l6 damages arising out of the

i'Fo- continuance of nows see fourth page.)

motor lorry accident on Kokatahi road. Mr Murdoch appeared for plaintiff and Mr Hannan for defendants. The following jury were empanelled ; James King. A. Krakowsky, Win. Keecli. S. H. Holley. S. Bassett, Robt. Stewart. K. 'l'. Stoop, H. It. Sweney. A. Hamilton. H. 'Wells, L. Kelly, AV. A. Wilson. Mr AV. M. Keecli was chosen foreman. Mr .Murdoch said by arrangement with counsel, the question for decision was that of damages. The defendants admit, liability, and therefore the matler for decision was considerably modified. The plaintiff was claiming £(\V> Is. Mr Hannan said he admitted liability and the question for decision was simply one of damages. « Mr Murdoch continuing dealt with the statement of Che claim, setting out the particulars of the collision on the Kokatahi road between the lorries .T Itansgrove and Sc-arle. whereby the plaintiff, James Kileullen was severely injured. Me claimed ClO -ts. hospital expenses and JDtit!o general damages. The total issue for the jury was what damages Kileullen was entitled to for tile injury lie had received. Kvidcnec was led as follows: James Kileullen. deposed lie was the plaintiff, ("p to .Nov. 1-1 was assistant fireman on the boiler at .Mandl’s at £5 per week. Before the collision on the Kokatahi road did not know anyone was behind. Felt a great hump that nearly knocked him out. He called out to get the timber away to let him get, dear. Was taken nut and laid on the side of the road. Then was taken in Scarle’s lorry to Dr. Baird’s house, lie remembered nothing after that. Remembered during the ride to town telling Searle to drive slow, owing to feeling great pain. Remomhcred asking for a drink at the hospital on tin* Sunday morning. (Hospital account for £l(i 4s admitted). Since leaving the hospital have been unable to resume former occupation, due entirely to the accident. Have received no money or payment siiiee coming out of hospital. To .Mr Hannan : lie; was in constant employment prior to the accident lor 21 years. Dr Bruce Baird, deposed lie attended plaintiff. The injury to him consisted of extensive bruising of the left chest, fracture of the Bth, 9th and 10th ribs, one or more of which lacerated the lung, causing a bleeding into the puoral cavity. This was accompanied by great shock. A second hemorrhage occurred three days later and for three ■ days his life was in great danger and after that he made tt good recovery. 11 is present condition is as follows. The patieiit complains of an inability to breathe freely. In regard to the injury to the lung the hemorrhage ami thickening of the pucra, which were a result of the accident have almost cleared up. The whole result of the accident was the poor response ol the man’s heart. His pulse sitting in a chair is 84. Alter rising himself 20 times off a chair the pulse is 144. This effort of rising caused considerable sweating. Two minutes later the pulse was 81. Two factors contribute to this: first is the mere definite shock of the accident; second is an element of nervous trouble. Then l would be a. tendency to improve in both of these factors. The most striking point i> the* response to effort,, ot the heart heats. To His Honour: He considered he would he able to do light work alter a time, say three months. Alter that a gradual amount of improvement and ultimate!v ho should roach two thirds of his old normal power. To Mr Murdoch: The present cardiac failure is attributable to the accident . To Mr Hannan: Fast, examined him on 29th January, and it was possible there was an improvement in his condition now. To .Mr .Murdoch: As late as last Monday he found a, 'light, net a very grea t improvomon I. Mr Hannan said the delcndnnts admit they were responsible for the accident and the iurv had to as-c.-s the damages that they thought plaint ill’ was entitled to. |)r K. Tciehclinann. deposed he was acting as medical officer at Westland Hospital two days alter the admission of Kileullen and was in charge for It days. After the first two weeks lie made an excellent recovery. F\atnined him on the title I ehruary. found a thickening >4 the It'll lower chest behind the fractured rib. There aas some dullness at the left base, no doubt cine to puoral thickening. The expansion ot the lelt chest was quite good though not as good as the right one*. Heart was sound, pulse regular, tongue fairly clean. Made him stoop up and down and found Ids ‘heart beating was not accelerated greatly. Afade a remarkably good recovery and there was no reason why lie should not he able to resume his old occupation. if lit' did light work for a start, (liven six months from date of injury lie should he able to resume ordinary eject] pa t ion. lie was lit for light work on fit It February. To Mr Alnriloi li : He meant that at

tin- etui ol' -six Minn th.x In- could do Id' old job again. The difference u ill l Dr Baird’s evidente was not u great ditlereuce. lie wax ol opinion tluit li is heart would ultimately recover. The normal pulse varied from (10 to 80. This concluded the evidence. Mr 11: 11111:111 said the onlv mat.lei to consider was the amount of damages to lie allowed. They had hoard ihe medical evidence and on that I hoy mlist judue. It was their duty to assess lln' loss lie had sustained. The Ids- of wit ups amounted to £.'l2<l. Mr Murdoch differed as to the contents of the statement of claim. The plaintiff was i>erl'eetly innocent as far as the accident was eoneerned while the defendants admitted that thev were responsible for. the accident. They .'had to decide as between the mcical witnesses. It was a (| nest ion of money on one side, and ol flesh and blood on the other. He left the case to the jury perfectly satisfied the claim was a genuine one and that plaintiff was entitled to the lull amount that he claimed. Mis Honour said the plaintiff was entitled to some damages and they had to assess the amount. The general damages was the amount plaintiff claimed for loss sustained and personal injuries received in connection with the accident. They had to consider what reasonable damages should be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff, ft was agreed that his ribs were broken and lungs penetrated, and other injuries as set out. and that as a. result there was a certain weakening of the heart. Thev had hoard the medical testimony and they had to consider that and come to a conclusion of the whole. Plaintiff's full capacity may ho reduced by one third, or not at all. Iliey ought to consider that because of negligence the plaintiff had been injured. and because of negligence the defendant ought to pay. They had to say how much was a lair and proper sum for the defendant to pay. The jury retired at 12.30 p.m. and returned at 12.10 p.m. villi a verdict for the lull amoun.t claimed. £01(3 Is. Costs were allowed on the highest scale, with witnesses disbursements, same to be passed by the Regitrar. The Court then adjourned at 12.50 p.m. till li> a.in. on .Monday.