Atkinson v. American School of Osteopathy
| Decision Date | 05 March 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 14818.,14818. |
| Citation | 202 S.W. 452,199 Mo. App. 251 |
| Parties | ATKINSON v. AMERICAN SCHOOL OF OSTEOPATHY et al. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Monroe County; William T. Ragland, Judge.
Suit by Grace Atkinson against the American School of Osteopathy and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Frank W. McAllister, of Jefferson City, James P. Boyd and E. T. Fuller, both of Paris, and C. E. Murrell and Campbell & Ellison, all of Kirksville, for appellants. John Whiteside, of Kahoka, W. W. Barnes, of Paris, and J. H. Whitecotton, of Moberly, for respondent.
This suit was instituted April 17, 1906, In the circuit court of Adair county. Plaintiff seeks to recover from the defendants for malpractice in treating her by the method or system commonly known as osteopathy. Plaintiff took a change of venue to Putnam county, where a trial was had, and a judgment resulted in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants in the sum of $10,000, from which an appeal was taken by the defendants to the Supreme Court of Missouri (see 240 Mo. 338, 144 S. W. 816), where the case was reversed and the cause remanded. Thereafter the venue was changed to Clark county, and again to Monroe county, in which latter county the case was tried twice, the first trial resulting in a hung jury, and in the second trial plaintiff recovered a judgment in the sum of $5,000, from which, after an unavailing motion for new trial, defendants bring this appeal.
A comprehensive, detailed statement of the facts in this case is found in connection with the Supreme Court's opinion when this case was there, to which reference may be had, in that, with a few minor changes, which will be noted in this opinion, the facts are identical with the case as we have it before us.
The amended petition, on which the case was tried, alleges that the American School of Osteopathy is a Missouri corporation owning a large amount of real estate, and conducts a school whereby it teaches the science of osteopathy, and has a regular organized faculty, composed of teachers of such science, conducting said school, and at the same time the members of the said faculty practice the science of curing and healing the sick and afflicted, and that it was the duty of the said faculty to treat and operate on students in attendance of said school without charge; that defendant Charles E. Still was a member of said faculty, duly authorized to practice his profession, and authorized to treat students of said school for any disease that they may have or contract during their attendance at said school. The petition then alleges that plaintiff became a student in the defendant school about October 1, 1901, and paid her tuition and attended the school until June, 1903, when she graduated and became a doctor of osteopathy; that at the time she entered the school she had a slight affection of the nasal passages that slightly affected her breathing; that the defendant Charles E. Still examined her, and undertook to treat her, and continued to do so until some time in April, 1902, when he "carelessly, negligently, and unskillfully treated and manipulated plaintiff's body, in so treating her for said maladies, that he negligently and carelessly broke and crushed plaintiff's sternum, commonly known as the breastbone, and forced the same in and upon her lungs, and bulged and forced out the cartilages of her ribs on the right side of her body into an unnatural position"; that as a direct result thereof "she became sick and affected, and has ever since suffered, with asthma, uterine and rectal troubles, loss of flesh, and suffered much bodily and mental pain, and her general health has been permanently injured, and she has been incapacitated from practicing her said profession or to earn her livelihood.
The defendants filed separate answers— Charles E. Still averring that he was and is on osteopathic physician, and that the plaintiff, when she entered the school as a student, and before that time, was affected with asthma; that during the time she was a student he treated her several times, always with his best skill and ability; and denied each and every other allegation, and for further answer alleged the pendency of another suit on the same cause of action by plaintiff against said defendant. The answer of the American School of Osteopathy is a general denial. Plaintiff's reply alleges that a suit had been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant Charles E. Still, but that it was not a suit between the same parties nor on the same cause of action, and that said suit had been dismissed and was not then pending.
The bill of exceptions which we have before us covers more than 500 pages. For the purposes of this case we set out such of the evidence adduced as we think necessary for a proper understanding thereof.
Plaintiff herself testified that she had gone to Kirksville to study osteopathy in September, 1901, when she was about 29 years old. At that time she was a little run down from nursing, but was in good health, and had never suffered with any physical ailments, except measles; that she did not have asthma when she entered the defendant school as a student; that during the two years which she attended the defendant school Dr. Harry Still gave her two or three treatments, immediately after she had become a student, after which time the defendant Dr. Charles E. Still took her in charge up until the time of her alleged injury in April, 1902; that on the day she claimed to have received the injuries complained of she testified that the defendant Charles E. Still came into her room and said, She said that she felt the crushing of the bones, but that there was not so much pain at the time; that it was the following day that she suffered much pain; that she kept going about the next day, but suffered—"long shooting pains," "darting pains," all through the chest on her right side. On the second day she got up in the morning and went to attend one of the classes, but she was suffering pain all the time, and had to leave during the second class on account of the pain; that in the evening of said second day her roommate went for the defendant Dr. Charles E. Still, who came and gave her treatment intended to relieve her; that when the defendant finished he said "Miss Atkinson, what makes me feel so badly is to think am the cause of all this suffering;" that the defendant gave her two treatments the day thereafter, but that she did not receive much relief therefrom; that defendant then suggested he send for his father, Dr. A. T. Still, who was the founder and president of the defendant school; that said Dr. A. T. Still, accompanied by Dr. George Laughlin, a doctor of osteopathy and a member of the faculty of the defendant school, came together and examined plaintiff, during the course of which Dr. Laughlin said, "The second, third, and fourth ribs are broken like a green stick fracture;" that Dr. Still said to Dr. Laughlin, "The trouble is here, George; the trouble is right here; that is sunk down on there; get your hands right on the back of the three ribs here, but especially the three ribs, and push it out, and shove the thing up away from the chest; it is sunk down on it." She said that the treatment given her by the defendant Still had crushed the breastbone, and that the breastbone was lying flat, back on the lungs, and was crushed back, and that three ribs were broken, and that such an injury would cause asthma; that in the fall of 1902 she had her first attack of asthma, and that it grew worse and worse until, when she graduated from the school, she was having repeated attacks of asthma, which continued off and on until the years 1905 and 1906, when she was not able to do anything; she was confined to her bed the greater part of the time; that she was again very ill in the summer of 1907; that her weight had fallen off from 102 pounds, which was her weight at the time she attended the school, until she weighed less than 80 pounds, and in 1907 her weight but 60 pounds. At the time of the trial the condition of her chest was much better than it had ever been, though not normal, and in her opinion never would be.
Dr. Polmeteer, a doctor of osteopathy, testified that he examined the plaintiff in the latter part of 1902, and found the middle part of the sternum lying down upon the lung, and stated that in his opinion it was caused by dislocation of some of the ribs; that the cartilages of these ribs seemed to be raised or bent.
Dr. Ash testified, for the plaintiff, that he was a practicing physician with 22 years' experience; that he had examined plaintiff, and found evidences of injury to the thorax on the right side, between the second and fifth ribs, and there was also a bulge of three ribs, which was evidence of an injury to or the fracture thereof. In his opinion the injury was caused by external violence, and that such injury could not have resulted from asthma.
Dr. F. O. Blattner testified, for plaintiff, that he was a practicing physician, and had examined plaintiff and found an...
To continue reading
Request your trial