DOCTOR SUED

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 22 July 1924, Page 5

DOCTOR SUED

X-RAY TREATMENT. HAND SEVERELY BURNED. (BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION.) AUCKLAND, July 21. Alleging negligent conduct, as a result of which his left hand was severely burned, Peter Andrew Nairn Smith, an engineer, of Auckland, took action in the Supreme Court against August Braekebush, masseur, Auckland, and George de Clive Lowe, meclieal practitioner, Auckland, claiming jointly and severally^a sum of £BOO general' damages, £250 special damages for the loss of profit from his business, and £IOO special damages for medical and hospital expenses. The case was heard before Mr. Justice Stringer and a special jury of twelve.

The statement of claim set forth that in September, 1919, plaintiff damaged his hand in a lathe and the wound did not heal completely. In May, 1920, defendants undertook to heal the hand by a course' of X-ray treatment. Braekebush gave nlaintiff a course of X-ray treatment, which Braekebush alleged was given under Vhe supervision and direction of Dr. effe Clive Lowe. It was alleged that defendants so negligently conducted the treatment that pjaintiff improperly suffered a severe X-ray bum, and as a result suffered great pain and incurred further medical and hospital expenses in an endeavour to remedy the evil. Finally, after a long course of unsuccessful treatment, plaintiff had to undergo an operation and have the burned portions of the hand removed anff a niece of flesh from his arm grafted on. Thereby Smith stiffened permanent disfigurement to his hand and lost much time and profit from his calling and incurred, further medical expenses. The defence set up by Dr. de Clive Lowe was a general denial that Braekebush gave plaintiff a course of X-ray treatment, which Braekebush alleged had been given under the supervision and direction of the defendant de Clive Lowe, and that defendant so negligently conducted the treatment that plaintiff suffered a burn. The defence filed by Braekebush was a general denial of the allegations and a denial that the treatment of plaintiff was directed to the healing of a wound caused by anv form of physical injury. Defendant alleged that plaintiff ’ was suffering from epithelio motous or cancer on the tissues on the back of the hand, and that he (Braekebush) undertook to and did treat such a condition according to and under the supervision of nlaintiff’s medical adviser, Dr. de Clive Lowe.

In evidence plaintiff said his business had gone hack £I4OO while he was under treatment

Medical evidence was given for the defence and the hearing was adjourned.