BOY'S SKIN GRAFTED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19860, 2 February 1928, Page 14

BOY'S SKIN GRAFTED.

DAMAGES CLAIM BY FATHER. JURY'S VERDICT CONTESTED. [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT. ] CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday. Whether consent had been given for Dr. William Howard Unwin, senior surgeon at the Timara Hospital, to remove for grafting purposes a shaving of skin from a boy's thigh was argued in the Supreme Court at Christchurch to-day, before Mr. Justice Adams. The South Canterbury Hospital Board, Dr. Thomas L. Parr, medical superintendent of the hospital, and Dr. William H. Unwin, as defendants in a claim for £IOO damages brought against them by Bernard Conlon, father of a boy named Bernard Conlon, applied for a new trial on the grounds that judgment given against them by a jury was against the weight of evidence. Mr. C. A. Treadwell (Timaru) appeared in support of the application, and Mr. F. D. Sargent represented the plaintiff, Conlon. The boy Conlon was in the Timaru Hospital on January 15, 1927, and defendants admitted that Dr. Unwin took from the left thigh of the boy a shaving of skin for grafting to the leg of another patient. Dr. Parr, medical superintendent, admitted that consent of the plaintiff was not obtained. Dr. Unwin submitted that it was no part of his duty to obtain consent from patients, and both defendants denied that such consent of plaintiff was necessary. Dr. Parr stated that plaintiff's son fully understood the nature of tho grafting before it was done. Mr. Treadwell said the jury had not discriminated, but had said they could not agree as to whether plaintiff gave his consent or otherwise. Mr. Treadwell moved for judgment for Dr. Unwin and for leave to move for judgment for Dr. Parr within 14 days, and for a non-suit. Alternately, he asked for a new trial. Mr. Treadwell characterised the previous action as one which supported the statement that in certain questions a jury's verdict could not be accepted as decisive. Ho recalled a case in which a woman's attitude and sobbing had been suggested by Mr. Justice Hosking as having had a probable effect on the jury. " In that case I learnt, myself," snid Mr Treadwell, "that it is practically impos sible to obtain from a common jury a verdict against a pretty woman who cries at the right times." After hearing legal argument His Honor reserved his decision.