114 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 



practice. Where the defendant raises these ques- 

 tions it will be necessary to get the testimony of 

 others, and especially of experts. In a suit for 

 damages arising from malpractice, in which a 

 veterinarian so negligently threw a horse as to 

 rupture his diaphragm, it was held that a non- 

 expert, who had frequently seen horses hobbled 

 and thrown during an experience of from twelve 

 to thirteen years, was competent to testify as to 

 the methods used."*^ 



85. The Veterinarian as a Witness. Whether 

 he be called as a witness of fact, or for his expert 

 opinion, the veterinarian should be careful to make 

 a clear distinction between fact and opinion. Judg- 

 ing from certain facts which he recognizes as 

 symptoms he may form the opinion, or diagnosis, 

 that a horse has pneumonia; but mistakes in diag- 

 nosis have been made by good men. It is there- 

 fore taking an unnecessary risk for him to assert, 

 even under the most persistent urging of a cross- 

 examining attorney, that the horse has pneumonia. 

 It is a peculiar psychologic fact that the ignorant 

 witness is often the one who is most positive in 

 stating his opinions as facts. He seems to attempt 

 to supply his lack of knowledge by vehement as- 

 sertions. A skillful questioner may often lead 

 such an one into making the most ridiculous state- 

 ments in regard to nonimportant matters, and 

 thus completely upset the value of his testimony 

 upon essential points. 



The witness should simply tell the tnith. Hf 

 should be impartial. So far as possible he should 



4* Staples V. Steed, 167 Ala. 

 24], 52 So. 646. 



