ACTION AGAINST A MEDICAL MAN.
CHRISTCHURCH, August 29. The case of Walmsley v. De Renzi, a claim for damages for alleged unskilful treatment, was continued to-day, when the evidence of the nurses who had attended plaintiff was taken, also thau of Edward Walmsley, the husband of plaintiff, and the medical evidence of Dr Henry De Renzi, Diamond, and Graham Campbell. The non-professional evidence went to show that defendant alone was cognisant of the operation performed, all the others being under the impression that the operation, would be one for piles. Dr B[enry De Renzi, defendant's brother, *aid that if he had been aware that the operation had not beeu authorised by the plaintiff he would have stopped the administration of ether. There are two more medical witnesses to be examined for the plaintiff, and counsel for the defence promises to get hia witnesses through on Wednesday. On adjourning Mr Justice Denniston called attention to the want of a shorthand writer for saving time, and said it was hard Oil a judge to have to act as a copying machine.
ACTION AGAINST A MEDICAL MAN.
Otago Witness, Issue 2375, 7 September 1899, Page 33
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in