The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1922-04-08
Royal A. Eggleston Given
$500 Damages for
Sponge in Abdomen
JURY FOUND THERE
WAS NEGLIGENCE
Drs. r. H. Ross of ST.. Johns
bury and D. r. Brown of
Lyndonville Defendants

Royal A. Eggleston of Canaan, \.
H., was to-day awarded in United
States court at Montpelier verdict
Of SO, 500 from DIR. r. II. Ross of st.
Johnsbury and DIR. d. r. Brown of
Lyndonville, in a malpractice suit
brought for $4,000. in which the plain
tiff alleged negligence on the part Of
the doctors because sponge was left
in Eggleston's abdomen after an OPP
Grafton for septic gall bladder. The
jury reported at 9:30 this morning,
and the court then took recess to
Tuesday morning, when the case OF
Vera Daniels, administrative Of the e.
tate of Lonis Daniels. W. the Boston
& Maine railroad will be taken up.
The Hggleston case went to the jury
last night shortly before 6 o'clock. The
arguments in the case started about
2:55 yesterday afternoon. Raymond
Trainor Of White River Junction made
the opening argument for the plaintiff.
He reviewed the case and impressed
on the jury that the point in issue was
not that the defendants saved the
plaintiffs life but rather that they
had been negligent in leaving the
sponge in the plaintiffs body during
the operation. According to the ex
pert medical testimony. the defend
~ 20. ID ~ tfao
within human power to sec that no
such thing could occur Mr.. Trsinor
argued to the jury that the defendants
did not do this. They knew that
sponge was missing and did not do
everything in their power to locate il.
Rolf Searles OF ST. Johnsbury opened
for the defense. He said during the
course Of his argument that the de-
PENDANTS had saved the life Of hu
man being. Had brought the plaintiff
from the very gates Of death. He
stressed on the appearance of the
plaintiff then in court, a man OF ~
years OF age. His appearance and
bright face and apparent xigor and
asked the jury If they would not be
proud Of father of that age. who
in spite of being at deaths door, looked
as he does now.
Warren n. Austin of Burlington, in
closing for the defense, termed the
work Of the defendants in saving the
life OF plaintiff As the most sacred
service that one man can perform for
another, that of saving his life. He
then proceeded to review the operation
and asked the jury 20 witness the OPP
Grafton. He enacted the operation very
wildly from the testimony introduced
and the jury watched him closely. He |
laid stress ON the fact that expert !
medical testimony had revealed the |
fact that such an accident" as he ex
pressed il. might have occurred even
under the best of circumstances. And /
that il the defendants by accident al 1
lowed this sponge 20 get into the |
wound realizing that they had not vol !
UNFAIRLY introduced it, they were not |
guilty of negligence.
David Porter of st. Johnsbury closed /
for the plaintiff. He ridiculed the idea 1
That the defendants were not negli 1
gent because they accidentally allowed 4
me ~punEt " tHAti tAt paAttnA ANT
iomen. Had they used the care and
'kill OF doctors who practiced in that
.ame general neighborhood. the sponge
would never have entered the body, he
aid. He cited Dr. Frank Farmer, a
ioctor of St. Johnsbury. and col
eague of the defendants, who testified
hat he had performed over four hun
lred abdominal operations and never
lad such a thing happen.
Judge II. b. Howe, in charging the
ury. said that the question of scci-
lent was not in the case; il was not
or their consideration. He said that
he question Of negligence was a gus
ion OF fact and for them to find. He
aid that the defendants were Obliged
o exercise the same degree of skill
nd care that other doctors used who
lracticed in that same general neigh
,oThood He said the jury might find
10Th defendants guilty or one of them
r that neither was guilty. To find
or the plaintiff the jury must find
hat he has established his claim by
fair balance of the evidence.
The case of Holbrook Grocery com
any against Ralph y. Hsmblet over ,
ugar, in which the plaintiff yesterday
eceived a verdict OF over $500. IL 20
e appealed to the I. :. circuit court
I appeals, il was stated to-day by
ne Of the attorneys in the case. The ,
pPeal win probably come up for trial
ext fall