DATE: Monday, September 15, 1997            TAG: 9709130015

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B8   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Editorial 

                                            LENGTH:   49 lines

JUDICIARY ODDBALL CASES AS LONG AS WE HAVE RESPONSIBLE JURIES, SOCIETY HAS NOTHING TO FEAR FROM ZANY LAWSUITS.

You have to hand it to the Norfolk jury whose common-sense verdict this week proved the civil judicial system often works.

The jury took only 30 minutes to reject the suit of a man who cut off his own hand then refused to allow the doctor to re-attach the severed limb. The man filed suit, alleging that the doctor should have obtained a court order to reattach the hand over his own objections.

One wonders why he didn't sue himself for the amputation. Perhaps that's next.

Odd lawsuits like this are the fodder of late-night talk-show monologues. But thanks to a conscientious, steady jury, this particular legal oddity was not compounded by a monetary award to the plaintiff.

No one doubts the anguish suffered by Thomas W. Passmore who stopped taking his anti-psychotic drugs, began hallucinating and then cut off his hand with a circular saw. When he was rushed to the hospital, he gave his permission to have the hand reattached but decided against it in the operating room.

Dr. Tad E. Grenga sought legal advice from a Norfolk Circuit Court judge who counseled him not to proceed with the operation because the patient could later sue him for assault and battery.

Faced with a Hobson's choice in the operating room, Dr. Grenga made a decision designed to prevent a lawsuit, only to be hit with one anyway.

Fortunately for Dr. Grenga, and society, the jury agreed that the doctor was in no way responsible for the unfortunate fact that Mr. Passmore must spend the rest of his life without his hand.

Another odd case is working its way through the Louisiana courts - that of a college student who drank so much at a fraternity party that he nearly died. He is suing a Baton Rouge bar because one of its employees was the president of the fraternity where he consumed too much alcohol. The frat president should have stopped him from drinking, the lawsuit contends.

In a sane world, a person who has too much to drink wakes up the next day with a miserable hangover and a firm resolve to moderate his alcohol consumption in the future.

The young man's reaction, like that of far too many Americans, is to file suit rather than take responsibility for his own folly.

It is up to juries to refuse to go along with frivolous suits filed by victims of self-inflicted wounds who are seeking a scapegoat. May cool heads prevail in Baton Rouge as they did in Norfolk this week.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu