Show QUESTION QU OF INTEGRITY Conflict of f Lawyers in iri ui Damage Case Casein Casel in lit Court 1 One of the most Interesting cases cates pending lending before beCore the district court co rt is the damage proceeding instituted by byA D A Lindsay agaInst the SL St Marks Clarks M iks hospital and two to of ot f its physicians ph Drs S 5 H Pinkerton and Union ton on The case which was wa fl March 3 last charges the physicians at the hospital with ith unskillfully amputating a limb of the plaintiff and unknown to o him leaving a drainage g pipe In jn the wound This the complaint alleges alle s caused a n delay In his recovery and rendered the condition of the leg such that hat if Ir an artificial limb lI nb can be used It t will be done only with great pain The complaint which was signed by George Udall and Judge E B V Hig Rig Higgins Riggins gins as attorneys for the plaintiff was forwarded to the defendants who em employed played Joyed Attorneys Farley Williams and George H II Smith to look after their Interests On April 22 the latter laUer filed an answer to o the complaint denying the Incompetency Incompetency incompetency of the physicians alleged In the complaint and asked to have the case ease dismissed on the grounds of an ac companying LInd LIndsay Lindsay say ay and his wife The affidavit sets forth that Lindsay has no desire to prosecute the case and that he had so notified his attorneys who Insist on prosecution In answer to this Judge Higgins several days das later filed a motion to strike out the affidavit of Lindsay from the record In an affidavit In sup support sUpport port of ot his motion Judge Higgins de tie denies nies ules that Lindsay ordered a cessation of prosecution and charges the plain plaintiffs tiffs affidavit with being the work o ohe of the he attorneys who Induced Lindsay to sign the paper for the purpose of o prejudicing the plaintiffs cause in incourt Incourt incourt court Judge Higgins furthermore charges that the affidavit was drawn up for the purpose of ot injuring the standing of ot himself and his colleague Attorney Udall and draw Into ques question question question tion their professional integrity The answer concludes that the affidavit is Irrelevant Immaterial etc and there therefore therefore 1 fore ought to be stricken from the records |