The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-07-16
DAMAGES
FOR SAILOR
Inter-IsIand Must Pay
Lorenzen for
Hurt.

Judge Estee rendered his decision
VS.. Inter Island Steamship Co., award
ing plaintiff damages in the amount of
s2940 for injuries received on the steam
err Noeau. Lorenzen sued for $40, 240
being damages for the injury, including
loss of wages and cost of. medical at
tendance. The court, in its opinion,
goes into the evidence in detail and
finds that the first mates injuries from
the sling load of sugar was not due to
his own negligence, but the warnings,
IL any. given by defendant were not
heard by plaintiff. In conclusion the
court says:
That the injury to libellant was caus-
ed by the improper handling of the APP
planes and gear of the Noeau by the
officers and crew thereof, who had ex-
elusive control OF the same in the
transfer OF this sugar is plain, after a
consideration of all the evidence; and
the fact of this exclusive control is an
important element in this class of cas-
es. MILLER VS.. o. S. s. Co., 11S n. z,
20S-9; Cummings VS.. N. F. Co., 60 Wis,
612: The Rober. Levers, Estee, j., p. l,
z; The Robert Levers, ia Fed. Rep,
S47) And especially is this SO in view of
the fact that the court is unable to hold
that there was contributory negligence
on the part of the libellant.
Now, as to the amount of damages,
There is no question as to the injury
to the libellant, and he is entitled to
some damages not alone for the pain
and suffering produced by the injury,
but also for the possible length of time
that he may be incapacitated from pur-
suing his calling of seaman.
1t Is in evidence that Lorenzen was
acting as first officer of the Irmgard, at
q salary of $50 per month when the ac-
cident occurred; that he was physically
4 sound, we'll man when he was injur-
ed; that he holds a certificate as first
officer for sail and certificate as sec
ond officer for steam. It seems rea-
sonable to suppose that if this injury
had not been inflicted he would have
been a sound man and able to pursue
his calling uninterruptedly at a salary
of at least $50 per month for many
years to come. DR.. Taylor an expert
called for the defendant, testified that
in his judgment, while the injury was
permanent, yet the body OF libellant
would adjust itself in time to the
shOrtness of the injured leg, and that |
ne thought "at the end of two years
the leg would be as useful as It was |
before 1t was hurt" 1 am inclined to
.hink that this is so. and being so. that
1t the end of two years he will be able |
% resume his vocation of seaman, if |
lot possibly before that time. L will /
therefore allow libellant the sum of
,1440, being the amount of wages at the
ate of $50 per month, which 1t is rea-
;onable to assume he would have been
lble to earn in two years from the time |
# the injury had he not been deprived
# the ability to do so by this injury.
In addition thereto ibellant is enti-
led to something for the injury itself
md the pain and suffering consequent
hereon. The evidence shows that the
injury was very grave one, in fact,
according to both the testimony of DIR.
1umpfris and DR.. Taylor. the injury is
although the disability
doubtless is not That while the bones
lave knit, the joinder is not perfect,
tut is an overlapping one; that there
8 curvature and the leg viii continue
o be from three-quarterS of an inch to
N inch shorter than the other In adj
lition to the breaking of the leg, the
ibellant suffered grave bruises, the
)ruise on the shoulder being ''exces-
lively severe" He was confined to the
Queens Hospital for three months, and
ome few days. suffering much pain;
md it is in evidence that he still suf-
ers pain, and according to Dr. Hum
AAlS' IAeie 10 d possibility That he VIII
always suffer pain. It is difficult to
pain in money. In most of the
Eases examined by the court wherein
INJURIES of a similar nature were sus-
aimed, the average damages assessed
s about $4,000, in full of everything.
However in the main, these cases show
In injury If not greater at the outset.
ret more severe in the permanent dis
Lbling effects than in the case at bar.
am therefore of opinion that in view
# all the circumstances of this case,
he sum of $500 would be a fair COM
,ensation for the extra pain and suf-
ering endured by libellant, and will al
ow that amount in addition to the
144o already allowed, making a total
Il $3.50, together with costs of suit