CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOLLOWS ASSAULT

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6545, 29 February 1928, Page 4

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOLLOWS ASSAULT

CASE DISMISSED WITHOUT COSTS Alleging that defendants had assaulted him without provocation and caused him severe bodily injury, Raymond Webby, contractor, of Palmerston North, claimed in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, from Joseph H. Collis blacksmith, and his brother, Albert Collis, farm labourer, both of Linton damages amounting to £SO, and in addition medical and other expenses, loss of wages, etc-, totalling £sl/15/-. Mr. Belling appeared for plaintiff and Mr Ongley for defendants. Plaintiff in evidence, stated that from August to December he was boarding with the Collises and on December 2 while ho swas on his knees mending his bicycle, the defendants struck him with their fists and kicked him on the ribs and log as a result of which ho had to seek medical advice and wag off work for five weeks. 1 He could give no rca son for the assault. In answer to Mr Ongley, plaintifi denied having misconducted himself the previous night when staying at defen dants’mother’s place. Mrs. Collis, the mother of defen dants, denied the allegations of tniscon' duct made against plaintiff, addingtbat Webby had been living with tho family on the best of terms. Tho present trouble had arisen out of the imagination of Albert Collis. Albert Collis, in evidence, stated that when he and his brother accused plaintiff of impropriety, Webby picked up n piece of wood and struck his brother over the eye with it. There was a general, scuffle between tho two but witness took not part in it. Joseph Collis, tho other defendant, denied kicking plaintiff O’- hitting him until after Webby lifted the piece of wood and caught witness on the head with it. Witness considered plaintiff had invented his story of tho incident. Mrs Collis jnr, wife of the last witness said she witnessed the fight from the kitchen window. Webby picked up a piece of wood and her husband then caught plaintiff around the waist. Albert Collis took no part in the affair. Dr. J, Miller stated that when plaintiff came to sco him in connection with tho assault, witness found bruising in the region of the ribs but on X-ray examination revealed no fracture, witness calculated that plaintiff would bo off work for four or five weeks as a ; result of the injury. | In giving judgment, His Worship characterized tho case as a rather extraordinary one, and the evidence, as in all such cases, was contradictory. No' doubt there had been an assault and plaintiff had received some injuries. It was hardly conceivable, however, that plaintiff had told a correct story—that the scuffle had started through no reason whatever. Tho defendants had: given a version that seemed to be near* er the truth and while not wishing to. comment upon plaintiff’s actions.- His' Worship considered it quite probable that Webby got no more than ho do-: served. There had been provocation consequently the claim would be dismissed. However, as there had been: an assault no costs Would bo allowed.