Hardiman v. Brown

• Decision Date: 03 January 1895
• Citation: 162 Mass. 585,39 N.E. 192
• Parties: HARDIMAN v. BROWN.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

162 Mass. 585

39 N.E. 192

HARDIMAN v. BROWN.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

January 3, 1895

COUNSEL

Wiggin & Fernald, for plaintiff.

Hesseltine & Hesseltine, for defendant.

OPINION

FIELD C.J.

The question put to Dr. Clark called for an opinion upon "the exciting cause of the illness" from which the plaintiff suffered from January 9, 1887, till her death, on May 18, 1892. The nature of the illness was described in the question. The answer of Dr. Clark was: "From the result of the autopsy, knowing that there was a tumor of the brain, I presume that was the exciting cause of the troubles from which she suffered." The exceptions recite that when Dr Clark was called as a witness "the counsel for the defendant, upon being asked by the counsel for the plaintiff if he wanted him to qualify him, said: 'Not at all. I admit Dr. Clark is a good physician,'--and later said 'You do not understand I admit he is an expert on tumors. I admit him to be a good, practicing physician, a graduate from a good institute, and of long experience.' " The exceptions also recite that: "Before the hypothetical question was put to Dr. Clark, he was asked if he was familiar with tumors of the brain, to which he replied that he was not. He was then asked if he knew what caused tumors, to which he answered that he did not mean to be understood that he understood the causes of tumors; that he knew what the authorities said in regard to them; that the causes were chiefly unknown,--to which question and answer no objection was made. The presiding justice ruled that the fact that he did not pretend to know anything about tumors, and the fact that there was a tumor there, did not preclude him from answering the hypothetical question, but ordered the following portion of his answer to be stricken out: 'As to what was the cause of the tumor, as I have said before the causes are chiefly uncertain. Tumors are caused from injuries to the brain.' " The counsel for the defendant contends that Dr. Clark was not shown to be qualified to answer as he did the hypothetical question put to him, and the question before us is whether it appears that the justice presiding at the trial erred, as matter of law, in finding, on the evidence recited in the exceptions, that Dr. Clark was qualified to give the answer he gave. Bank v. Hobbs, 11 Gray, 250; Perkins v. Stickney, 132 Mass. 217. We think that a good, practicing physician,...