SUPREME COURT

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 287, 31 May 1912, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

AUCKLAND SESSIONS. By Telegraph-Press Association. . Auckland, Thursday. Decrees nisi were granted i„ the following cases: Wm. Edward Birkett t Margaret Birkett and Alexander way (co-regpondent), and Alice Elizabeth P«ker v. Ira George Parker, misconduct. INVERCARGILL SESSIONS. , Invereargill, Last Night. In the case in which Henry Fitzgibbon, stock agent, was charged with attempted rape on a gl rl at Underwood, the jury disagreed, and a new trial was ordered for neit week. PALMERSTON NORTH SESSIONS. Palmerston N., Last Night. At the Supreme Court a jury of twelve were engaged all day with the case of Walter Hatch against" the Powell Process Company, Rangataua. Plaintiff was engaged on October 13 last at the defendant company's sawmill cutting waste timber into lengths with a swing saw as the timber came from the saw bench. While doing so the saw swim* against him, causing a wound in the pit of the stomach, from the effects of which plaintiff was disabled for life Plaintiff alleged that the defendant was guilty of negligence in failing to place a curb chain on the saw to prevent it swinging too far. The defendant company denied negligence, and pleaded that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, and also that he had voluntarilv taken the risk of injury. Lengthy medical evidence was taken, the effect of which was to show that plaintiff hnd been seriously injured by permanent weakening of the abdominal wall. The Inspector of Machinery gave evidence that he had ordered safe-guards for the swing saw, but this had not been done till after the accident. Evidence was tendered by the defendant company to show that a curb chain was not necessary. The jury had retired for an hour when it returned for further directions, and counsel then consented to take a three-fourths verdict. After a further lengthy retirement the jurv found that the company had been guilty of negligence in not chaining the saw and that plaintiff had not been guilty of contri-' butory negligence, but that he had voluntarily taken the risk of iniurv. The damages were assessed at £3OO. Mr. Fitzherbert moved for judgment for the defendant company on the ground that the jury's finding'that the plaintiff had [voluntarily incurred risk amounted to a [verdict for defendant company. After further argument the case was adjourned.