Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1916-10-12
SUPREME COURT
Case of Merrill VS.. Odi0rne> Is
Continued Through Wednes.
day-Will Be Resumed This
Morning

days session of the supreme court. A
large portion of the day was devoted
to the giving Of medical testimony by
doctors, who were witnesses for the
defense The case will be resumed at
the opening Of today's session.
Mrs Blanche Bracket of Saco.
daughter of the plaintiff gave testi-
mony regarding DR.. Odiorne's treat
ment of the plaintiffs leg. She testi-
fled that upon one occasion when the
weights attached to the plaintiffs leg
fell off DR.. Odiorne was Immediately
notified and he said as he came in
What in He'll is the matter now"
The doctor then put the bandage
it. Witness stated that the plaster
paris boot covered the plaintiffs ankle
and she testified that the leg was brok-
en over again and was reset. She had
never heard her father ask anyone to
take off the weights and she said that
they were not taken off at his request.
Witness had never heard DR.. Odiorne
complain that the weights had been
taken off and she had never heard any
garding a lack of attention to the case.
Upon REORGANIZATION by Attorney
Littlefield witness testified that upon
one occasion the weights were put in
a chair. She had gone to her fathers
house in Pittston at the time that he
broke his leg.
Witness upon redirect examination
testified that she remembered that her
father had a burn on the side of his
leg and at the time of the setting Of
the leg nothing was done to relieve the
scription for a salve which healed the
sore.
Mrs. Agatha Adjutant of Biddeford.
a daughter of the plaintiff. testified
that she went to her fathers home
when she learned that her father had
broken his leg. She gave testimony
regarding the weights falling off and
she described the manner in which DR..
Odiorne had placed the bandage on the
foot. After the bandage was taken off
Or. Odiorne had put a plaster paris
shoe on the foot. The boot had COW
cred sores on the plaintiffs foot which
the witness indicated. She testified
that the boot remained on about two
weeks. until DR.. Odiorne's attention
was called to it by Mrs. Merrill. Upon
one occasion she had heard Dr. Odiorne
say that the bones had knitted. About
10 weeks after the accident she had
heard DR.. Odiorne say to Mr.. Merrill,
Il suppose you know you have a
,;srb Mr. Merrill
had answered that he was aware of it.
DR.. Odiorne had said that all there was
to do was to either have the leg broken
over again or to go to the hospital.
She described to the jury the manner
in Which her mother mad dressed the
heal and she said that DR.. Odiorne's di-
rections were followed implicitly.
Witness had heard the doctor inquire
after money; she had never heard him
complain to Mrs. Merrill about the
manner Of the care OF Mr. Merrill. DR..
Odiorne had said that the leg should
remain in the wire splnt at least eight
weeks and perhaps 10 weeks.
Witness upon cross examination said
that the bad result as stated by DR.
Odiorne was from the fact that the leg
was two or three inches short. She
knew that opiates were left to be adj
ministered to her father at times when
he was in pain and she said they were
administered every four hours accord
ing to the doctors direction. At one
time when the cpiates had given out
a neighbor came over and injected
morphine into her fathers arm.
testified that only on one occasion had
they told her the weights had been put
in a chair.
Defense.
The defense was then stated by At
torney knight of Gardiner, who stated
that one wouldn't expect from a coun-
try doctor the skill of a city physician
and that a country doctor cannot an
swer calls as promptly as the city
physician. And he said that In the
contract between the doctor and the
patient the patient is expected to do
his duty toward procuring a recovery
and If the patient by his own negli-
gence contributes to a poor result he
cannot hold a physician responsible
for damages. The physician is to use
the best judgment Of which he is ca
Fable. The contention of the defend
ant was that the doctor possesses ade-
uuate skill to attend to the case; that
he gave it due care and careful atten-
ton, answering the calls as speedily as
possible: that this result is no fault of
Or. Odiorne but that 1t is the fault OF
Mr. Merrill. who time after time re-
moved the weights, which must be kept
On to get good results.
Sixteen witnesses were sworn in for
the defendant.
Defendant on Stand.
DR.. Joseph E. Odiorne of North
Whitefield, the defendant. testified that
ne is a graduate of Bowdoin College
and the Medical School of Maine. On
Feb. IA, 1918, he was called at the
Merrill home. Mr. Merrill was in bed
with a fractured thigh put up in
splints and the leg was elevated at an
angle of about As degrees. On a cord
running through a pulley there were
flatirons used as weights. In his book
Of entries he had put the record of his
calls usually within "a hours after the
call was made. On Feb. IA he had re-
duced the fracture and had recorded it
in his entry book. He testified that he