Star.
London, England, 1820-10-19 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGF.NCR.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, OCTOBER 17,
ALEXANDER V. KINGSTON AND OTHERS.

Mr. Alexander is a printer, of the Jewish persuasions
residing in Whitechapel; the defendants are the Albion
Fire and Life Insurance Company ; and this action
was brought upon a certain policy granted by that
Company, by which, in June, 1819, the plaintiff's
stock, utensils, and furniture, were insured to the
amount of £2,000. In February last a lire happened
in the house of Mr. Alexander, and that gentleman
delivered upon oath an account to the Company, in
which he estimated bis actual loss at 1.3,10(1; and
claimed, under his policy for £2,000, a sun) exceed-
ing £1,950. It appeared, in the course of the cause,
that Mr. Alexander had been in a singular degree
visited by that element, against the ravages of which
the Albion Company undertook, in the year 1819,
to protect him, the accident which gave rise to
the present proceeding being the third, within eight
years, which had occurred in the plaintiffs house.
About seven years ado, he recovered a sum of money
from the Royal Exchange Company; and no longer
since than the year 1817, he claimed from the Eagle
Company ka,ogo, and received, under an award.
£750, subject to the payment of his costs. The
plaintiff's present claim was resisted by the defendants
as exaggerated and fraudulent ; and an offer of re-
ference, which was twice repeated in tie progress of
the trial, being rejected by Mr. Alexander, the cause
was left to the decision of the Jury,
A vast mass of evidence was adduced upon both
sides, but the detail was by no means interesting.
The Learned Jude, a little before eleven at night,
concluded bis summing up; and the Jury, after re-
tiring about half an hour, found for the plaintiff, to
the amount of 421,200.
OCTOBER 18.—suipp V. DARANPA.
-

This was also a case of great length, and of inte-
rest comparatively trifling. The plaintiff, who is a
farrier near Layton, in Essex, employed the defend-
ant, a surgeon and apothecary, to attend him under
the affliction of a dislocated arm, The allegation
-was, that the defendant had, by gross negligence or
want of skill, failed to reduce the dislocation pro-
perly; anfl,. the defence was, that the arm being duly
reduced M the first instance, the plaintiff had, by his
own habits of carelessness and intoxication, produced
the evil which he now attributed to his medical attend-
atit,—A variety of witnesses, chiefly of the working
class, were called as to the facts, who contradicted
each other, and, occasionally, themselves; and several
surgeons of the first celebrity gave their opinions
upon the case, medically considered.
.The Learned JUDGE collected generally from the
evidence, that, even taking the reduction of the ori-
ginal dislocation to have been effected, the liMb must
have been re-dislocited during the attendance of the
defendant. There could be no doubt that, within a few
days of the time at which Mr. Daranda's attendance
had ceased, the plaintiff had been examined by other
cminent surgeons. Those surgeons had found his
arm dislocated, and were of opinion that it must have
been in that state for at least a month or six weeks.
The dislocation, so long neglected, had, at aiat time,
become incurable; and the plaintiff was deprived of
his right arm for the remainder of his days. It was
in evidence that the slightest degree of skill and at-
tention would enable a medical man to distinguksh
between a dislocated and reduced limb ; and, if the
Jury thought that there bad been gross negligence
on the part of the defendant, they would give the
plaintiff a reasonable compensation.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £2OO.

%The Earl of larzapoog., as Lore Warden of the
Cinque Ports, has appointed GliolGs StaIINGERI Esq.
Captain of the Moats bulwark at Dover.