Civil Suit Against P.U.P. Area Rep Traversed to September Session of Supreme Court
Jose Abelardo Mai
The civil suit against P.U.P. Orange Walk South Area Representative, Jose Abelardo Mai, was back before Supreme Court Justice Courtenay Abel today. Oral submissions were to be heard, however, there was a minor hiccup which favored both legal sides. The parties did not have each other’s physical copies of supporting authorities on the case and so the matter was unable to proceed as scheduled. Mai is being sued for damages by the family of fifty-nine-year-old Julia Arana who was knocked down by Mai on April first, 2016 on the Phillip Goldson Highway. After showing signs of improvements, health professionals at the K.H.M.H. released Arana, but she died two months later. A post-mortem examination determined that the cause of Arana’s death was ‘acute cardio respiratory failure and severe bilateral broncho pneumonia.’ Her family believes that the injuries sustained as a result of the accident directly contributed to her death, prompting her son, Nissan Arana to file the lawsuit. After the brief session, attorneys for both sides spoke to the press.
Sheena Pitts
Sheena Pitts, Attorney for Nisan Arana
“The Claimant’s case is that one, the deceased was knocked down by Ablelardo Mai at a time when he ought to have seen her and avoided her. As a result of knocking her down, he caused her sever injuries. Not minor injuries. ‘Moderately severe brain damage’, that is how it was classified. Those injuries were the same injuries that caused her death. So that is the case of the claimant. One, you are responsible, because you knocked her down. Two, these are the injuries that she suffered. Three, from those injuries she died and four, damages. Restore the decease; in this case it won’t be the decease, the estate of the decease to a position had you not done those things.”
Julie-Ann Ellis Bradley
Julie-Ann Ellis Bradley, Attorney for Jose Mai
“I believe that the issue is going to be one, the court has to address the question of liability. I think that is going to be one of the main things. After liability is determined, the question as to damages will be the next thing. So damages relate to how much and liabilities will determine how much. You did hear My Lord say in court, we are to also address the court in the issue of quantum, damages, how much and of course that is whether or not you are saying full liability of not.”
Reporter
“Of course you client disputes any liability. Is that accurate?”
Julia Arana
Julie-Ann Ellis Bradley
“The client’s view and the client’s position is that the accident happened so quickly that it was hard for him to do otherwise. I think with anybody, we are all drivers on the road and we know that sometimes things happen and it might give you full time to respond. It is something that may happen to any of us really. That’s pretty much has to square off. But remember that there are always two sides to every story. There is the view point that the driver has. There is the view point from the pedestrian’s perspective. So the court has to take both of them now and determine, having the overall view, what to come to.”
The matter was adjourned to the September session of the Supreme Court.
