74 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 
from ordinary practice, he should be held liable 
for harm resulting. In an Iowa case a veterinary 
student attempted to operate upon the shoulder of 
a horse. He was sued for malpractice, and was 
at first held liable for the damage inflicted, al- 
though it was shown that he had not expected to 
receive pay for his services; but on a rehearing 
the decision was reversed, because it was proven 
that his services were rendered, under protest, at 
the earnest request of the owner of the colt. It 
was shown by the testimony offered that the stu- 
dent had called attention to his incompetence, be- 
ing still an undergraduate. 
The general rule of law is thus stated by Mr. 
Cooley: 1! ‘‘When friends and acquaintances are 
accustomed to give, and do give, to each other 
voluntary services without expectation of reward, 
either because other assistance cannot be procured, 
or because the means of parties needing the help 
will not enable them to engage such as may be 
within reach, the law will not imply an undertak- 
ing for skill, even when the services are such as 
professional men alone are usually expected to 
render. * * * But when one holds himself 
out to the public as one having professional skill, 
and offers his services to those who accept them 
on that supposition, he is responsible for want of 
the skill he pretends to, even when his services are 
rendered gratuitously.’’ 
In 1856 in a suit for malpractice against a veter- 
inarian in Indiana the jury were instructed in the 
10 Morrison vy. Altig, 134 N. 110n Torts, p. 779. 
W. 529, reversed on rehearing, 
157 Towa 265, 138 N. W. 510. 
