143,540 judgment pages 132,515 public-register pages 276,055 total pages

Michelle Maloney v Estie Stephens

2015-05-29 · Saint Vincent · Claim No. SVGHCV2009/0149
Metadata
Collection
High Court
Country
Saint Vincent
Case number
Claim No. SVGHCV2009/0149
Judge
Key terms
Upstream post
21891
AKN IRI
/akn/ecsc/vc/hc/2015/judgment/svghcv2009-0149/post-21891
PDF versions
  • 21891-michellemaloneyvestiestephens.pdf current
    2026-06-21 02:56:43.749858+00 · 75,560 B

Text

PDF: 3,025 chars / 497 words. WordPress: 2,863 chars / 494 words. Word overlap: 99.2%. Length ratio: 1.0566. Audit: normalized equal (none). Token overlap: 100.0%.

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. SVGHCV2009/0149 BETWEEN: MICHELLE MALONEY Claimant AND ESTIE STEPHENS Defendant Appearances: Mr. Ronald Marks for the Claimant Mr. Olin J.B. Dennie for the Defendant ------------------------------------------------------------- 2011: March 23 2015: May 29 ------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT

[1]BRUCE-LYLE, J. – The Claimant is a citizen of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and is of full age and capacity.

[2]The Defendant is also a citizen of the State of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and resides in close proximity to the Claimant.

[3]The Claimant alleges that on or about the 1st day of December 2007, the Claimant being in the vicinity of her mother’s home in Richland Park was struck on the right wrist and on the left side of her face by the Defendant, causing her pain, injury, loss and damage.

[4]The claimant said she left the scene and reported the matter to the Police and then to Dr. Prasada Rao who examined her injuries and then referred her to the Milton Cato Memorial Hospital for further treatment.

[5]The Claimant stated her particulars of injuries as –: a) An incised wound about 2 ½ inches on the left side of her face b) An incised wound about 1 inch long on the right wrist c) The Claimants injuries were sutured during treatment d) The wounds although now healed has left the claimant with keloid/hypertrophic scar formation.

[6]The Claimant tendered in evidence a Medical Report from Dr. Prasada Rao dated the 14th April 2008 and another dated 2nd of March 2009 from Dr. St. Clair Thomas.

[7]On the 9th day of April 2008 the Defendant was convicted before the Mesopotamia Magistrates Court for wounding the Claimant. The Claimant relies on this fact of the Defendants conviction.

[8]The Claimant therefore claims – 1) Special damages of $200 and continuing 2) General Damages 3) Interest as the court deems fit 4) Costs DEFENDANT’S CASE

[9]I have carefully analysed the Defendant’s case via her witness statements, viva voce evidence and her written submissions after the case. To be truthful and honest I am not convinced with her case as juxtaposed to that of the claimants. This is a clear case where mediation should have been the main course of the Dinner.

[10]I see no merit in the Defendant’s case more especially the telling conviction on her by the Magistrate’s Court in Mesopotamia.

[11]All told, I have reviewed the notes of evidence in this case thoroughly, analysed the witness statements of both Claimant and Defendant; and thoroughly analysed the written submissions submitted at the end of the case. Having done so I hereby conclude – CONCLUSION 1) That this court finds for the Claimant; 2) The Defendant’s case against the Claimant is dismissed; 3) The matter is hereby sent to the Master for determination of Damages and Costs. ___________________________________ Frederick V. Bruce-Lyle HIGH COURT JUDGE

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. SVGHCV2009/0149 BETWEEN: MICHELLE MALONEY Claimant AND ESTIE STEPHENS Defendant Appearances: Mr. Ronald Marks for the Claimant Mr. Olin J.B. Dennie for the Defendant 2011: March 23 2015: May 29 JUDGMENT

[1]BRUCE-LYLE, J. – The Claimant is a citizen of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and is of full age and capacity.

[2]The Defendant is also a citizen of the State of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and resides in close proximity to the Claimant.

[3]The Claimant alleges that on or about the 1st day of December 2007, the Claimant being in the vicinity of her mother’s home in Richland Park was struck on the right wrist and on the left side of her face by the Defendant, causing her pain, injury, loss and damage.

[4]The claimant said she left the scene and reported the matter to the Police and then to Dr. Prasada Rao who examined her injuries and then referred her to the Milton Cato Memorial Hospital for further treatment.

[5]The Claimant stated her particulars of injuries as –: a) An incised wound about 2 ½ inches on the left side of her face b) An incised wound about 1 inch long on the right wrist c) The Claimants injuries were sutured during treatment d) The wounds although now healed has left the claimant with keloid/hypertrophic scar formation.

[6]The Claimant tendered in evidence a Medical Report from Dr. Prasada Rao dated the 14th April 2008 and another dated 2nd of March 2009 from Dr. St. Clair Thomas.

[7]On the 9th day of April 2008 the Defendant was convicted before the Mesopotamia Magistrates Court for wounding the Claimant. The Claimant relies on this fact of the Defendants conviction.

[8]The Claimant therefore claims – 1) Special damages of $200 and continuing 2) General Damages 3) Interest as the court deems fit 4) Costs DEFENDANT’S CASE

[9]I have carefully analysed the Defendant’s case via her witness statements, viva voce evidence and her written submissions after the case. To be truthful and honest I am not convinced with her case as juxtaposed to that of the claimants. This is a clear case where mediation should have been the main course of the Dinner.

[10]I see no merit in the Defendant’s case more especially the telling conviction on her by the Magistrate’s Court in Mesopotamia.

[11]All told, I have reviewed the notes of evidence in this case thoroughly, analysed the witness statements of both Claimant and Defendant; and thoroughly analysed the written submissions submitted at the end of the case. Having done so I hereby conclude – CONCLUSION 1) That this court finds for the Claimant; 2) The Defendant’s case against the Claimant is dismissed; 3) The matter is hereby sent to the Master for determination of Damages and Costs. Frederick V. Bruce-Lyle HIGH COURT JUDGE

PDF extraction

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. SVGHCV2009/0149 BETWEEN: MICHELLE MALONEY Claimant AND ESTIE STEPHENS Defendant Appearances: Mr. Ronald Marks for the Claimant Mr. Olin J.B. Dennie for the Defendant ------------------------------------------------------------- 2011: March 23 2015: May 29 ------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT

[1]BRUCE-LYLE, J. – The Claimant is a citizen of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and is of full age and capacity.

[2]The Defendant is also a citizen of the State of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and resides in close proximity to the Claimant.

[3]The Claimant alleges that on or about the 1st day of December 2007, the Claimant being in the vicinity of her mother’s home in Richland Park was struck on the right wrist and on the left side of her face by the Defendant, causing her pain, injury, loss and damage.

[4]The claimant said she left the scene and reported the matter to the Police and then to Dr. Prasada Rao who examined her injuries and then referred her to the Milton Cato Memorial Hospital for further treatment.

[5]The Claimant stated her particulars of injuries as –: a) An incised wound about 2 ½ inches on the left side of her face b) An incised wound about 1 inch long on the right wrist c) The Claimants injuries were sutured during treatment d) The wounds although now healed has left the claimant with keloid/hypertrophic scar formation.

[6]The Claimant tendered in evidence a Medical Report from Dr. Prasada Rao dated the 14th April 2008 and another dated 2nd of March 2009 from Dr. St. Clair Thomas.

[7]On the 9th day of April 2008 the Defendant was convicted before the Mesopotamia Magistrates Court for wounding the Claimant. The Claimant relies on this fact of the Defendants conviction.

[8]The Claimant therefore claims – 1) Special damages of $200 and continuing 2) General Damages 3) Interest as the court deems fit 4) Costs DEFENDANT’S CASE

[9]I have carefully analysed the Defendant’s case via her witness statements, viva voce evidence and her written submissions after the case. To be truthful and honest I am not convinced with her case as juxtaposed to that of the claimants. This is a clear case where mediation should have been the main course of the Dinner.

[10]I see no merit in the Defendant’s case more especially the telling conviction on her by the Magistrate’s Court in Mesopotamia.

[11]All told, I have reviewed the notes of evidence in this case thoroughly, analysed the witness statements of both Claimant and Defendant; and thoroughly analysed the written submissions submitted at the end of the case. Having done so I hereby conclude – CONCLUSION 1) That this court finds for the Claimant; 2) The Defendant’s case against the Claimant is dismissed; 3) The matter is hereby sent to the Master for determination of Damages and Costs. ___________________________________ Frederick V. Bruce-Lyle HIGH COURT JUDGE

WordPress

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. SVGHCV2009/0149 BETWEEN: MICHELLE MALONEY Claimant AND ESTIE STEPHENS Defendant Appearances: Mr. Ronald Marks for the Claimant Mr. Olin J.B. Dennie for the Defendant 2011: March 23 2015: May 29 JUDGMENT

[1]BRUCE-LYLE, J. – The Claimant is a citizen of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and is of full age and capacity.

[2]The Defendant is also a citizen of the State of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and resides in close proximity to the Claimant.

[3]The Claimant alleges that on or about the 1st day of December 2007, the Claimant being in the vicinity of her mother’s home in Richland Park was struck on the right wrist and on the left side of her face by the Defendant, causing her pain, injury, loss and damage.

[4]The claimant said she left the scene and reported the matter to the Police and then to Dr. Prasada Rao who examined her injuries and then referred her to the Milton Cato Memorial Hospital for further treatment.

[5]The Claimant stated her particulars of injuries as –: a) An incised wound about 2 ½ inches on the left side of her face b) An incised wound about 1 inch long on the right wrist c) The Claimants injuries were sutured during treatment d) The wounds although now healed has left the claimant with keloid/hypertrophic scar formation.

[6]The Claimant tendered in evidence a Medical Report from Dr. Prasada Rao dated the 14th April 2008 and another dated 2nd of March 2009 from Dr. St. Clair Thomas.

[7]On the 9th day of April 2008 the Defendant was convicted before the Mesopotamia Magistrates Court for wounding the Claimant. The Claimant relies on this fact of the Defendants conviction.

[8]The Claimant therefore claims – 1) Special damages of $200 and continuing 2) General Damages 3) Interest as the court deems fit 4) Costs DEFENDANT’S CASE

[9]I have carefully analysed the Defendant’s case via her witness statements, viva voce evidence and her written submissions after the case. To be truthful and honest I am not convinced with her case as juxtaposed to that of the claimants. This is a clear case where mediation should have been the main course of the Dinner.

[10]I see no merit in the Defendant’s case more especially the telling conviction on her by the Magistrate’s Court in Mesopotamia.

[11]All told, I have reviewed the notes of evidence in this case thoroughly, analysed the witness statements of both Claimant and Defendant; and thoroughly analysed the written submissions submitted at the end of the case. Having done so I hereby conclude – CONCLUSION 1) That this court finds for the Claimant; 2) The Defendant’s case against the Claimant is dismissed; 3) The matter is hereby sent to the Master for determination of Damages and Costs. Frederick V. Bruce-Lyle HIGH COURT JUDGE

Processing runs
RunStartedStatusMethodParagraphs
14215 2026-06-21 17:36:38.819747+00 ok pymupdf_layout_text 12
4877 2026-06-21 08:17:30.677929+00 ok pymupdf_text 23