A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1901, 8 June 1889, Page 3

A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

Davison v. Edgeworth. At the R.M. Court, Timara, yesterday, the Resident Magistrate gave judgment in the case of Davison v, Edgeworth, claim £47, general and special damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff through being kicked by a horse in charge of defendant, at the Timaru show grounds in October last. The claim was made up as follows : —general damages, £lO ; 16 weeks loss of employment at 30s, £24 ; cost of maintenance and attendance at the hospital, £8; other medical expenses, £4; travelling expenses attending hospital, £1; total £47. Mr Hay for plaintiff, Mr White for defendant. The evidence, both for plaintiff and defendant, was fully reported in our columns some weeks ago. The judgment was as follows; —The plaintiff and defendant in this action were at the Timaru Show on the 31st Oetoberlast,the formerin charge oftwo mares, and the latter leading an entire horse, and were waiting to leave the ground at 4 p.m. It was shown at the trial that the plaintiff was near the gate, and that when it was opened by the gatekeeper he proceeded to go out in charge of his two mares, he being the first in a line, a number of others being behind ready to go out in their turn. The defendant was not in this line, but was away from the gate in a different part of the ground with his entire horse, and instead of waiting till the mares had gone out he led his entire forward (regardless of the gatekeeper, who called to him several times to go back, and attempted to go out at the gate, and in front of plaintiff and his mares. In going through the gateway the defendant’s horse kicked the plaintiff, and cauesd the injuries now sued for. It was shown that it was a dangerous thing to bring an entire in front of mares in a gateway, and that it is customary on occasions of this kind to let the mares go out first; that in this instance there was no room at the gateway but what defendant farced for himself. An experienced man must have known the risk he was running, and should certainly have paid attention to the gatekeeper, who spoke loud enough, and was heard to give him warning by others, and presumably by the defended, The defendant, then m his eagerness to leave the show ground, leading an entire amongst' mares and horses, acted in a rash and imprudent manner, and must be held liable for damages. No contributory negligence by the plaintiff was proved. In considering the question of damages, however, the conduct of the plaintiff after the accident has to be considered. If he was imprudent and thereby retarded his own recovery, that must go in reduction of damages, and I think the medical and other testimony shows that in going to the Oamaru show, and in not allowing himself perfect rest prescribed by Dr Hayes, his illness and consequent incapacity to work were considerably aggravated. Dr Hayes describes him as an unmanageable patient throughout, and says that it took a week to put his knee in, and that six week’s further rest should have made the knee as right as ever, with proper care. I assess the damages as follows: —Seven weeks loss of time at 30s, £lO 10s; medical attendance, £3; hospital, £8 ; other damages', £1; total, £22 10s ; for which I give judgment for plaintiff, with costs.