The Oklahoma City times. [volume] (Oklahoma City, Okla.) 1908-1984, 1915-06-26
'SHALl A Jury
GUESS HER AGE
This Question Was Decided Today
By Judge Oldfield In Case Where
Woman Is Plaintiff
COURT ORDERS HER TO TELL

Judge OIdfIcld today sustained II
motion filed by the attorney for the
defendants to compel the plaintiff, to
make more definite and certain her al.
legations In the case of Xepha $. Ken.
yon against DR.. Lulu Andrews aud
Dr Arthur A. WILL The plaintiff
VIII be required To give her age.
II Is mmnuul Ia require women to
give their nge IN litigation Of any
KIND, hut In this pu,r the plaintiff al.
legeS that she ha- been rendered un
attractive to men by the operation
performed upon her recently by the
defendants, and now they want to
know the age M which woman
thinks she could cease to be- ultrar.
tive to men, II she ever reaches that
age
The plaintiffs attorney argued thut
every woman had the ualipnnhlr
right 4" retain her uttrHctiyrupss ~
long rs puSsIhle, and that the age NJ
the plaintiff did not enter into the
question at all. lie touched upon the
point that 1t is uugulluut for any man
lo Inquire too clo-rly into the facts
about a woman, ngr
Not Gallant Thing to DO
Attorney Lee / Wilson appearing
for the plaintiff uumuicd that It
would not be showing proper gal
laulry Wu the PM " the court To re-
uulrc his client 'o come into court
ana announce her age under oath.
hut Judge Oldfirld decided against
him Arguments uD the motion at
Iraclcd large audience no the court
room today
/ The Plaintiff alleges that the oper.
alton performed hy the defendants
was hunglr~omc and that II did net
have the result She was told il would
have Ihn ait wa, for $4,000 dam
ages
Attorney Lee did mot mention the
age uf his client when the motion wa,
argued today That has heretofore
remained secret and no intimatiou
NJ II Is given In the petition. The mo
tiou having been sustained by Judge
/ Oldfcld the plaintiffs ngc will hay,
To be- given II thr ease ever comes tC
/ trial
Case DevOlyeS an Age Issue
Jnmes s. Ross attorney for the de
fmdaut>. argued that the claims oI
the plaintiff rested almost entirely
upon her age II She Is a Young wo
man hc said the court and the iurl
should know H. II she Is past the ug,
when her attractiycurss Tor men h
mot an asset then II should be known
the jury should not be- subjected I,
the ordeal " muklug II guess Mel
nrc provcrhiaIly poor guessers whcl
the age NJ wumun is involved, h,
added. and should not be- compclle,
tu resort tu that method when sucl
a large sum is involved
Soon after the suit was filed Or
Arthur 4 win entered public de-
nial that be- had anything 10 do will
the operation lie said that he III,
not know the plaintiff and had uevc
seen her Later he recalled that h
had performed the operation hut de-
uicd that thc result was the same Il
stated In the plaintiffs petition.
The Kenyon suit is set Tor tria
soon, but wilt likely 20 over for
time ON account NJ the order of IN
court 10 make the petition more difln
ilc and certain The suit will not "
withdrawn. II IL understood unles
the plaintiff should decide to refus
the order of the court to give her age
In that ease there would be nothing
to do except tu withdraw the action