LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 760, 8 March 1910, Page 9

LAW REPORTS.

' ACTION FOR DAMAGES. .PLAINTIFFS CASE FAILS.' - The civil sessions of the Supreme Court wore commenced yesterday morning, before the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout. The first case was that in which Eliza Jane Anniss claimed ,£250-damages from F. Baynor. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. A. Blair for the defendant. . Mr. Wilford said 'that .his client was the wife of Richard Anniss, seaman, of Qoombe. Street. : Her allegation waa that ft certain extraction of teeth mado at the American Dental ; Parlours, was .carried out negligently and unskilfully, and that: her • mouth "was serio.usly' and unnecessarily injured. Eliza Jane Anniss stated in'evidenco that on Friday, .'July 9, eleven teethwere extracted from her lower jaw, and the bleeding did. not cease for 24. hours. Qn the. Saturday, the gums were plugged, and Dr.. Bowerbauk, ; whom she called in, prescribed a gargle and poulticing. Her chiii turned black, and similar discol* oration .took place elsewhere. Oil. July 28, .she had had four- teeth extracted frpm-the upper jaw by another dentist— i and the gums healed up in two days. -An account, for 10s., medical/attendance and expenses, had -been rendered to ;the~ dentist, but this had not , been - paid. . To Mr. Blair: Before the operation she had not had neuralgia, but -had ' slight aches in 6ome of the . teeth. ' •* | His Honour: I cannot understand why a person, should have eleven sound teetn extracted. Dr. Ewart stated that; in-August,- he was ; coiisulted. by .Mrs. Anniss, who -.com- > plained of great pain in the lower jaw. In September, without ,an anaesthetic, an.attempt was made.to reduce a partial' dislocation of .-the'.lower jaw, but the jaw "came out" again immediately. .On January 6, witness - administered "an anaesthetic, and, assisted by 'Dr.' Herbert, endeavoured to replace- tho ■ jaw-in position. 1 The jaw would not remain "in place now; - and-it was still out of . position. . Cross-examined, Dr. Ewart stated that he/had found .no - conclusive, indication .that -Mrs.: Anniss.: had "been unskilfully treated by •■the dentist. of .the - jaw ■ ■ was fairly :■ common in - tho : extraction -of teeth; Richard Anniss,- husband of the. plaintiff, detailed, interviews ho had had ■ with the manager of 'the .Dental Company, who. said he would refund the ifil deposit paid by Mrs.' : Anniss.- / Witness, said: "Thank- you; jyou are very : good.". A few- minutes later .Marsden offered £i,which witness refused to-accept. Witness /and .'his wife had been married ■ for- 30 years,, and' -Mrs. / Anniss. had previously .enjoyed the best ,of healthEvidence as to pain and inconvenience -suffered by Mrs.. : Anniss-,was given by 'Prudence Wilson (sister of Mrs. Anniss) and by Mary Ann Madden (a'neighbour). The Defence. Mr. Blair submitted : that . there was really no case to answer, except possibly as regarded the-bruises. •, It' was fortunate that Mrs; ■ Anniss had been examined by her own doctor a day and a half after the operation. Dr..,Bowerbank; who his Honour would notice, had not been called by - the'other Bide, would, however, be called to- describe the - symptoms. '. He had. found nothing' moire - than might - be expected!to follow the -removal of' teeth. ; Dr. Martin.-stated, that ■ he 'had ; been called •in 'once 1 or. twice, to. 1 assist'at operations, in-' the :■ American: -Dental Parlours, and he had 6Mn Mr.- Chamberlain operating. In his opinion, Chamberlain'was a capable f dentist: 'Ho.; : had examined Mrs. Aiiniss, whose , claim was the .first he had heard of against Dr.' '•RaynSr; There:-was :-.a slight laxation ; of the. jaw, which nioyed ; freeljr out and in.j- This partial dislocation might have be|n cduscd prior to the operation. Dislocation of- .the ;jaw had ."often been .catisedi by laughing,'..and- witness knew of fa rbiktft ■eSsS i K nf? l 'dislocati6n* ! 'thr3flgh yawning. :- ■ ■ '.- ;Dr._ Cohill; also stated the. result of his examination of the patient. : Dr. Bowerbank, who was called at: this stage, stated that there was not an unusual amount of • injury. Nelson.. Marsden, ; .registered '.dentist, manager of the American Dental Parlours, stated_ that the business had been 'commenced in, February last year, and Mr. Chamberlain , had .operated on between 2000 and 3000' patients. This was the first case in which there had beenany allegation- of, negligonce or': unskilful: treatment.:- Seeing-that Mrs. Anniss had been put to-the expense of engaging, a doctor, : . witness had offered , to ' .pay. 3)r.Bowerbank's fee, and to contribute 10s. for the purchase-of'tonics., " V> ■

Albert Hammond Chamberlain, dentist, stated that he had had 15 years' experience, and ho .(lid the- ivhole ofJhe extracting , at' the American ; Dental Parlours. Mrs. Anniss had six or seven teeth, extracted. -The teeth were unusually lone in. the roots,,' and . wero difficult to pull, v : Mr. Wilford: Do you know that the plaintiff went to you a healthy woman, and came; away a hopeless invalid, and .-has been ill ever since?— When she came,in, she was not in a good state of. health. It appeared, to me that she was fun down, possibly by indigestion.She had bad teetn. Her jaw was not dislocated when she. came there. ' His Honour . said' the./ onus*, of proof rested with plaintiff,. and in face of the evidence, -she could not, succeed;: 1 ' ;' 'Mr. Blair said that.'he would: make no : application. for. costs.. : . Judgment was accordingly entered fox the: without costs.