CHILD CLAIMS DAMAGES

Taranaki Daily News, 14 February 1931, Page 9

CHILD CLAIMS DAMAGES

JUDGE EXONERATES SURGEON HEALING OF FACTURED ARM. FAILURE TO PROVE NEGLIGENCE. By Telegraph—Press Assn.— Copyright. Wellington, February 13. A claim for damages in an action in which a boy who had been a patient in the Wellington hospital and the doctor who attended him were the plaintiff and defendant respectively, was disallowed by Mr. E. Page, SAL, who delivered reserved judgment in the Magistrate s Court to-day. . Reviewing the ease, the magistrate said that plaintiff, Malcolm Richardson, a boy aged six, was admitted to hospital suffering from a green stick fracture of both bones of the right forearm. The fracture"was reduced and the arm set by the defendant, Dr. William Bracewell .Mercer, Dunedin, who was then house surgeon at the hospital. The broken bones subsequently knitted in perfect position and made a. good and complete recovery, but complication, by way of the contraction of some muscles of the forearm, early developed, and this entailed medical attention and a subsequent period of massage treatment. Plaintiff and his father and mother now jointly brought the action claiming to recover from the defendant £2OO for damages. It was- claimed that the condition of the boy’s arm was brought about by negligence and unskilfulness on the part of defendant. The magistrate said there was ample authority approving of the type of splint used, though it was also true that other equally eminent authors disapproved it. The important question ,in the case seemed to be whether, having adopted the type of splint, defendant took adequate care in subsequent treat-, inent of the boy. The weight of evidence appeared to be that in view of the satisfactory condition of the arm, defendant was justified in allowing the boy to be taken home on the day following the setting of the limb. Defendant was described by medical witnesses on both sides as one of the best house surgeons the hospital had had, being careful, attentive and thorough. The magistrate said he had come to the conclusion that negligence on the part of defendant was not proved, and the claim must fail. Judgment was entered for the doctor with costs.