Louisville Lawyer
VOL. II LOUISVILLE. KY •• DECEMBER. 1956 No.1 Local Bar Observes Law Day
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: Counsel harangues a •skeptical jury
during a mock-up murder trial held recently in Allen Court Room.
Senior students appeared as counsel, :the jury being composed of
students from the Arts &: Science college. Proceedings resul:ted in a
hung jury.
Harper, Anderson, Waller Win Locally;
Represent School in St. Louis Regionals
Spence Harper, Ken Anderson and Lou Waller emerged as winners in the
local moot court finals, thereby winning a trip to St Louis for the regional
finals as representatives of the U. of L. School of Law. The "Supreme Court,"
consisting of Professors Ralph Petrilli, William Peden and Carl Warns, heard
oral arguments from six finalists, Harris Berman, Harold Stumbo, Carl BenAlumni
News
Bart Brown Sr., Louisville lawyer
and member of tl1e law school faculty,
has been elected president of the
University of Louisville Law Alumni
Association for the year 1957. Other
officers elected include Raymond
Schultz, Paducah, first vice-president;
Louie Nunn, Glasgow, second vicepresident;
and William B. Peden,
Louisville, secretary- treasurer.
The election was conducted by
means of a mail ballot published in
the May, 1956 issue of the Lawyer.
Officers will take office at ilie annual
alumni dinner to be held in the
spring of 1957 during the Kentucky
State Bar Association meeting.
-----0---- ---
Briefing Service
The Law School Briefing Service
has handled 15 problems so far iliis
semester, reports Richard Iler, student
supervisor. Cases range from labor
contracts to personal injuries.
New staff members appointed this
fall include Kenneth Anderson, Edwin
Cohen, Spence Harper, David Pottinger
and Louis Waller from the day
school, and William Crutcher and
Joseph Weiman from the night
division. Membership now stands at
15.
singer, and the three winners. The
case involved the problem of criminal
insanity as a defense.
Criminal responsibility, under the
legal and moral traditions of the Western
world, is predicated upon the
concept that those who, by their own
free will and with evil intent, commit
acts which violate the laws of man,
shall b criminally rcspansible tc the
State for those acts. Insanity in some
form at the time of commission of
the act has long been held to be a
defense. But tl1e comts, in their desire
to maintain order and safeguard the
public, have had to keep a tight rein
on the elements constituting legal insanity,
lest the defense become too
commonplace and become a barrier
to justice. Even today, under the
strict construction given insanity as
a defense, the accused in a high percentage
of the homicide cases pleads
insanity.
At one time the U.S. Supreme
Court recognized the "irresistible impulse"
test, holding that where one
had an impulse to commit a criminal
act which could not be resisted or
overcome because insanity or mental
illness had destroyed his freedom of
will and his power of self-control and
of choice as to his actions, he should
be acquitted of the crime.
(Continued on Page 4, Col 3)
1 Holds Meeting in Kentucky Hotel
To Discuss Current Practical Problems
The Louisville Bar Association observed
November 8, officially proclaimed
as "Law Day in Kentucky"
by Gov. Chandler, w i t h a daylong
meeting and luncheon at the
1
BRANDEIS CENTENNIAL
TO BRING SCHOLARS
The University of Louisville will
commemorate the centennial of the
birth of Justice Louis Brandeis on
December 18, university officials recently
announced.
Plans call for a convocation in the
Playhouse at 11 a.m., with Dr. Paul
A. Freund, Harvard law professor and
one-time law clerk of Justice Brandeis,
as speaker. Honorary degrees
will be awarded at this time to Dr.
Freund, Justice Sherman Minton, re~
ently retired from the Supreme Court,
and Dr. Alpheus T. Mason, Princeton
law professor and Brandeis scholar.
Following the convocation a luncheon
will be given on campus. In
the evening a buffet supper will be
held at the Pendennis club with Dr.
Mason speaking. Guests will include
members of the local and state bar
associations and the law school
faculty.
Justice Brandeis was a native of
Louisville and is considered one of
the foremost jurists produced by
Kentucky. He was appointed to the
Supreme Court in 1916 and retired
in 1939, two years JJefore his death.
RECENT VISIT IMPRESSES
JUDCE ELWYN THOMAS
Judge Elwyn Thomas, Justice of the
Florida Supreme Court, visited the
law school on October 30 in his official
capacity as Supreme Justice of
Phi Alpha Delta Law Fraternity
Recognized as one of our country's
most able jurists, Judge Thomas was
impressed with the law school's building
and library and stated that these
facilities compared favorably with
those of several of the larger schools.
Commenting on the present state
of legal education, Judge Thomas attributed
the modern lawyer's superior
preparation to participation in moot
court while in law school. The judge
has been one of the foremost proponents
of giving more training in the art
of advocacy, and feels that the moot
court program has fillep the bill.
(Continued on Page 4, Col. 4)
Kentucky Hotel. The morning was
occupied by discussions of legal
problems currently important to the
practicing attorney, while the afternoon's
activities included addresses by
Louisville physicians on problems
common to both the legal and medical
professions.
First on the day's agenda was an
address by Judge Lawrence Grauman
on current problems involving the
rules of procedure. Discussing the
various pitfalls in this phase of practice,
the judge estimated that 50 per
cent of practitioners have now mastered
the rules.
Commissioner Jack Mudd of the
Jefferson Circuit Court spoke next
on the ins an outs of judicial sales.
Outlining the procedure from ilie
standpoints both of the commissioner,
and the lawyer whose client's goods
are being sold, Commissioner Mudd
advised the lawyer who has such a
case to study the applicable statutes
closely.
Next on the program was a discussion
of problems in the Courts
of Equity by Judges Macauley Smith
and Stuart Lampe of the Jefferson
Chancery Division. The judges reminded
those present that the equity
docket is the heaviest of all the divisions,
containing 56 per cent of all
cases.
Bar President Speaks
Following a recess for lunch, the
meeting reconvened for a talk by
Col. Carl C. Heustis, Louisville Chief
of PoUce, oiLtbelacilities and services
of the new police building Col. Reustis
also interpreted a statistical report
showing an increase in the number of
automobiles and accidents in Louisville.
After a short address by David A.
Maxwell, president of the American
Bar Association, Dr. Charles F. Wood
opened the discussion of interprofessional
problems with a technical ex-
(Continued on Page 4)
ODK TAPS 2 STUDENTS
The national men's honorary fraternity,
Omicron Delta Kappa, selecting
on the basis of scholarship, leadership
and activities, recently tapped
law seniors Richard Iler and Spence
Harper.
Requirements for acceptance into
ODK are tl1at the student have a
cumulative grade standing of at least
1.5, and have participated in sufficient
student activities to earn 10
activity points.
Two THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
1£~ttnrtal
The American Law Student Association in a recent bulletin announced
that the University of Virginia's Virginia Law Weekly had
won first place in the printed category of the annual law school
newspaper competition. Runner-up in this category was the Cornell
Law Forum.
The winners were presented their awards at a meeting in Dallas
of the ALSA, in conjunction with the 79th annual meeting of
the American Bar Association. The ABA has sponsored the ALSA
as part of its law student program since 1949, for the express purpose
of improving the quality of the legal profession. In spite of
the progress the ·legal profession was making through integrated
bars, higher standards for accredited law schools throughout the
country, minimum fee schedules, etc., the profession realized it
was conducting a never-ending rebuilding program that depended
upon strict enforcement from the ABA for its success, and that the
lawyer must be educated as to the proper standards of the profession
rather than coerced by threats of punishment. Thus, out of the
bel~ej that lawyers, like leader~ (or as leaders) are made and not
born, the ALSA was conceived to promote education in the standards
of the profession. An amazingly simple step, if it is true that
preventive action excels remedial action.
Perhaps the biggest contribution that the ALSA makes to the
law student is the opportunity. it gives him to belong to a "legal
organization." No matter how many meetings a student attends of
the local, state, or even national bar association, so long as he is
a student he has his bar examination ahead of him before he can
become a member of any bar organization. But the ALSA, through
the numerous advantages it offers to the student, typical of which
is the law school newspaper competition, is filling this gap, and only
the future can tell how successful it is. Some graduates consider the
three years spent in law school only a mandatory prerequisite to law
practice; some consider it a limitation imposed to restrict the number
entering the profession and to thus better the income of the average
attorney; others, with a grain of wisdom, trace the successful attorney's
career back to a "successful" interim in law school. Without
debating the problem, this much is certain: any improvements, any
contributions the ABA and the local bar associations can make to
the law schools throughout the country are certain to be worth the
investment.
Are The Casebooks Here To Stay?
First principles are once again being questioned. The axiom
presently under attack is one of the most basic of all: the case
method of instruction. The case method was criticized by a number
of legal educators in the survey of the legal profession conducted
by the ABA the last few years. Some of 6ose polled felt that Dean
Langdell's original concept has been lost sight of; some thought
the reading of so many old opinions forms unwholesome thought
and writing habits; and there were those who believed the method
does not give adequate preparation in the practica~ side of the law.
Some realists said the method is weak because students tend to lose
interest in reading cases after their first year.
Q1f1r 14nui.anillr iGaroy rr
Published by the University of Louisville School of Law Student Bar Association
four times a year for School of Law students, faculty and alumni.
Editor-in-Chief ............................... ............................ ......... Richard A. Revell
Managing Editors .. ...................................................................... Bert Edwm·ds
Earl O'Bannon
Feature Editor ............................................................................ Carl Bensinger
News Editor ............................................................... : ............ Melbourne Mills
Associate Editor ........................................................................ Raymond Suell
Faculty Adviser .................................................................... Robert W. Foster
Victor W. Ewen Has Been Active
Since Graduation Six Years Ago
This issue of the Louisville Lawyer salutes one of the younger lawyers of
the Bar who graduated from this Law School in 1950. In the six years that
he has been a member of the Bar, Victor Wilson Ewen has been a credit to
the legal profession and to the University from which he graduated.
In the year 1955 he was elected
president-elect of the Younger Lawyers
Conference of Kentucky and in
the spring of 1956 he started serving
in that office, which he presently occupies.
In this capacity he has been
instrumental in promoting the American
Bar Association membership drive
in Kentucky, which was an outstanding
success, and he has also done
successful work on the minimum fee
schedules and presently is aiding in
the formation of bar associations in
those counties and cities where a bar
association is not presently organized
and where there are s u f f i c i en t
members of the Bar to warrant such
an association.
He was a workmen's compensation
referee for the period 1951-1956, and
in this capacity gained the respect of
members of the Bar who brought
cases before him for his fairness and
integrity and for his knowledge of
workmen's compensation law as well.
While in school Ewen was active
in student affairs, and is past justice
of the Phi Alpha Delta legal fraternity,
is a member of Omicron Delta Kappa
ational Honorary Society, and Phi
Kappa Phi Honor Society.
After his graduation from law
school he was one of the leaders instrumental
in organizing the Louisville
Alumni Chapter of the Phi
Alpha Delta legal fraternity and served
as the first justice of this chapter.
Ewen is married, is the father of
three children, and lives and has his
home at Shady Lane, Anchorage,
Kentucky. He is active in community
affairs in the Anchorage-Middletown
area and is vice president of the
Middletown Rotary Club.
Victor W. Ewen
Mr. Ewen is a member of the
Louisville, Kentucky, and American
Bar Associations, and at the present
time is chairman of the Medico-Legal
Committee of the Junior Bar Conference
of the American Bar Association,
and is a member of the Nominating
Committee of the Kentucky
State Bar Association.
Mr. Ewen was born in Sturgeon,
Kentucky, on April 18, 1924, and
attended Berea College before coming
to the University of Louisville
School of Law.
He is an active trial lawyer and is
a partner in the firm of Jones, Keith
and Ewen whose offices are located
in the Republic Building, Louisville,
Kentucky.
The Louisville Lawyer staff. From left. standing, Edwards, Bensinger,
O'Bannon, Suell, and Mills. Seated, Fo•3ter and Revell.
THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
SunJnJary JudgenJenls
By Judge Lawrence S. Grauman
Civil Rule 56.03. Motion and Proceedings
Thereon. The motion shall
be served at least 10 days before the
time fixed for the hearing. The adverse
party prior to the day of the
hearing may serve opposing affidavits.
The judgment sought shall be rendered
forthwith if the pleadings, depositions,
and admissions on file,
together with the affidavits, if any,
show that there is no genuine issue
as to any material fact and that the
moving party is entitled to a judgment
as a matter of law. A summary,
interlocutory in character, may be
rendered on the issue of :tiability alone
although there is a genuine issue as
to the amount of damages.
-1:1-u! ~i il. c~ . -r~ula.tedprocedure
in civil cases in Kentucky
prior to the Kentucky Rules of Civil
Procedure becoming effective July 1,
1953, did not provide for a summary
judgment, and if issues were formed
by the pleaclings, neither the plain- .
tiff nor the defendant could get a
judgment on the merits until the
case came on for trial.
The Rules of Civil Procedure provide
for an innovation that expedites
the administration of justice and prevents
delay which in many cases
works a hardship. Rule 56, "Summary
Judgment," authorizes the
Court to consider material de hors the
pleaclings and offered by a party, or
by the respective parties, in detennining
whether a genuine issue actually
e'<ists as to any material fact. If it appcau
from documents presented in
connection with the motion for summary
judgment that the state of the
evidence is such that the moving party
would hn entitled to a directed verdict
at '.he trial, no material issue of
fact exi :s, and the Court is authorized
to dispo· ' c>f the case by summary
judgment.
CR 56 folh:ws very closely F.R.C.P.
56. There are m:my cases where no
genuine issues of fact actually e'<ist
but where issues are r:~ised l; the
pleadings, and Rule 56 i" for the purpose
of clisposint; of such cases by
summary judgment. While the motion
may be employed to accompbh the
function of the general r.~emurrer
under the former Civil Coo'.e, vet U1e
rule is much more extensive l:1 ihut
the Court's consiceratio:1 is not restricted
to the allegations of tl1e pleadings.
In Myers, et al., v. District of
Columbia, 17 FRD 216 (D.C. D.G.
1955), District Judge Holtzoff delivered
an excellent opinion granting a
motion for summary judgment although
a material issue of fact was
formed by the pleadings but where
material de hors the pleadings was
presented for consideration on the
motion for the Court to determine
whether a genuine issue actually
existed as to any material fact. Judge
Holtzoff, after quoting F.R.C.P. 56,
said:
"Obviously, the Rule does not contemplate
that it is sufficient to warrant
a denial of the motion if the
pleadings create a formal issue as
to a material fact. Were the Rule
to be so construed, it would be
rendered nugatory."
CR 56 has been construed by the
Kentucky Court of Appeals in the
case of Continental Casualty Company,
Inc., v. Belknap Hardware and Manufacturing
Company, 281 S. W. 2d 914,
wherein, speaking for the Court,
Judge Cammack said:
"The purpose of summary judgment
procedure is to expeclite disposition
of civil cases and to avoid
unnecessary trials where no genuine
issues of fact are raised. A summary
judgment may be invoked in any
case where the record shows that
there is no real issue as to any
material fact with respect to a particular
claim or part thereof or defense
thereto. Watts v. Carrs Fork
Coal Company, Kentucky, 275 S. W.
2d 431. The party moving for a
summary judgment has the burden
of establishing that no genuine
issue as to any material facts exists
and also that he is entitled to judgment
as a matter of law. If uncontroverted
affidavits which clearly
disclose the facts show that a
genuine issue does not exist, the opposing
party has an obligation to do
something more than rely upon the
allegations of his pleacling. Since
the moving party has the burden,
he must make a prima facie showing
that would entitle him to a summary
judgment. The opposing party is
then required by counter-affidavit,
or otherwise, to show that evidence
is available justifying a trial of the
issue involved."
As CR 56 authorizes that material
outside the pleaclings may be considered
on motion for summary judgment,
affidavits may be filed in support
of or in opposition to the motion.
The hearing of a "motion for summary
judgment" is not a trial, and
on the motion the Court should take
that view of the evidence presented
most favorable to the party against
whom the motion is directed, giving
to that party the benefit of all reasonable
inferences that may be reasonably
drawn from the evidence. This is
the same rule of law which is applicable
when tl1e Court hears a motion
for a directed verdict.
The purpose of the rule was not
~o deny the right of trial by jury where
there are material issues to try, and
summary judgment should not be
granted unless the Court is satisfied
that there is no genuine issue as to
any material fact to be presented to
the jury-if a jury has been demanded,
or to the Court if a jury has not been
demanded.
Summary judgment is a drastic remedy,
and, for that reason, trial judges
The author of this issue's review
article is Lawrence S. Grauman,
presently Judge of the Jefferson Circuit
Court, Common Pleas 5th circuit.
Well known to the practicing attorney
and the students at U. of L.
Law School, Judge Grauman has participated
in about every phase of the
legal profession. Without repeating
his achievements and the history of
his career, sttffice it to say that he
helped write the civil rules of procedure,
and still serves on the ittdicial
rules committee.
should exercise great caution and
care in granting such motions. In the
case of Halterman v. Louisville Bridge
& Iron Company, Kentucky, 1955, 280
S. W. 2d 175, the Court of Appeals
held that whether or not the evidence
presented would require a directed
verdict upon a trial is only one of
several possible approaches to the
problem, and if there is any reasonable
doubt on the question, a summary
judgment should not be granted.
Some courts have gone so far as
to hold that summary judgments
should not be entered except where
the moving party is entitled to judgment
beyond all doubt.
Let us consider examples with reference
to when a summary judgment
should be granted and when it
should be denied. Take a situation
where the plaintiff sues the defendant
on a note alleged to have been signed
by the defendant. The plaintiff moves
for a summary judgment supported
by an affidavit sworn to by himself
or by some other person having personal
knowledge of the facts, in which
the details are set forth showing that
in the affiant's presence the defendant
signed and delivered to the plaintiff
the note on which the suit is brought.
The defendant files an answer denying
the material allegations relative to the
signing and delivery of the note but
does not file an affidavit denying the
Three
averments 'of the affidavit filed by
the plaintiff. The plaintiff should receive
a summary judgment wiiliout
waiting for the case to come to trial.
Suppose, however, that the defendant
in such a case files an answering
affidavit denying under oath
that he never signed the note and
stating that if the incident related in
the plaintiff's affidavit ever took
place, some imposter must have impersonated
the defendant. Here an
issue of fact is created, the motion for
summary judgment must be denied,
and the case will have to be iried.
Suppose, also, that it should appear
from an affidavit made and filed by
the plaintiff that the note was signed
by a person who was acting as an
agent of the defendant, and suppose
that the defendant files an affidavit
denying the agent's authority to execute
the note. Thus a material issue
of fact has been created. The motion
for a stm1mary judgment must be
denied and the case come to trial. Assume,
however, that the plaintiff,
realizing that the issue of agency is
the vital issue in the case, takes the
deposition of the alleged agent and
elicits proof showing that as a matter
of law the alleged agent had ostensible
authority to execute the note. The
plaintiff having made a motion for
summary judgment on the basis of
his affidavit and of the deposition, the
defendant files an affidavit denying
the agent's authority. If on the basis
of the record the <::ourt should rule
that ostensible authority existed as
a matter of law, it would grant the
motion or a summary judgment; otherwise
it would deny the motion and
let the case come to trial.
From the illustrations set out above
it is seen that the rule for summary
judgment is designed to provide a
prompt, businesslike, inexpensive
method of disposing of any cause
which a discriminating search of
merits in pleaclings, depositions and
admissions on file, together with affidavits
submitted on the motion,
clearly shows not to present any
genuine issue of material fact requiring
disposition on trial. The Judge should
determine whether there is a genuine
fact issue as to a material fact, but
he is not to decide issue if he finds it
to exist. The primary purpose of our
judicial procedure and the governing
rules is to facilitate the granting of
justice and to bring about an impartial
and expeditious determination of the
essential merits of the issues between
the parties. The summary judgment
rule contemplates and it was intended
that "just disposition of the merits"
will be facilitated, "determinations
on the basis of procedural niceties"
will be avoided. To achieve that end,
the rigid requirements under the former
Civil Code are thus relaxed or
dispensed with where a strict adherence
to them would bring about
unnecessary delay or injustice.
Four THE Lams viLLE LAWYER
t SI~denl Organizalioas
DELTA THETA PHI PHI ALPHA DELTA
, Having inaugurated the semester
't'ith a rush party in September, the
Delts announce that the following
men were formally pledged at the
monthly dinner meeting on October
17: Estill Banks, Charles Borie, Tom
:prooks, Kirby Collins, Tom Corun1,
Robert Fleming, Bill McCaslin, Hay
McKinney, Jess Riley, Bill Robbins,
Bob Schnatter, James Stites, Jeff
Vaughn, Dan Walton, AI Vittitow,
Steve Robbins, James Heiple, Paul
~oss, Virgil Bolly, Jack Rissinger,
J.ohn East, Tom Connors, William
eonard, and H. L. Williford.
Guest speaker at this function was
bean A. C. Russell.
Arnie Grever is now successfully
com:alescing from a recent operation.
Plans are now being formulated for
a joint party with PAD sometime be ·
fore Christmas.
ELWYN TIJOMAS
(Continued from Page 1)
Judge Thomas presently holds the
elected office of chairman of the section
on judicial administration of the
'American Bar Association, the high'
est position which any jurist may attain
in the ABA. He was first
-elected to the Florida Supreme Court
!n 1938, was re-elected in 1944, 1950
~nd was unopposed this year.
t
.
i
THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
University of Louisville
School of Law
2301 South 3rd Street
LOUISVILLE 8, KENTUCKY
.FORM 3547 REQUESTED
The :1.9-man PAD pledge class recently
dected Harry Hargadon as
justice. Other officers elected include
Stu Speckter, vice-justice; Alan Gordon,
secretary; Bud Fisher, treasurer;
and Bill Burks, marshal.
Other men pledging on October 10
include Gordon Bertram, James Butts,
Willis Ewing, Eulyn Dean, Don Hatfield,
Marty Geruso, Sal Oliva, Mike
Quinn, George Gabehart, Dave McDowell,
Milledge Galphin, Robert
Durning, Gerry Malone, and Cliff
Duncan.
Robert Haddad, a recent gradualt1
now practicing in Louisville, spoke at
the installation banquet on the subject
of "The FBI and College Days."
At the _November banquet, Ben
Morris, res1 · entc ounse for-13""r6wnForman
Distillers Corp., spoke on the
topic of "Corporation Practice."
New officers of PAD include Richard
Revell, justice; Ed Cohen, vicejustice;
Marty Liebman, secretary:
Bert Edwards, treasurer; and Dick
Moorman, marshal.
Joe Schwab, Ron Fifer and Joe
York are back in law school and active
again in PAD.
_____ ,o-----
MOOT COURT CLUB
The Moot Cout Club announces
new officers for 1956-57: Barry Wehrman,
president; Earl O'Bannon, vicepresident;
and Bill Ruhe, secretarytreasurer.
The fall moot court program is now
under way, with many participants
preparing briefs and oral arguments.
Upper-classmen are judging the freshman
arguments, with upper-class contests
being judged by faculty members.
Activities will be completed before
Christmas holidays begin.
--- --0- - -----
STUDENT BAR ASSOCIATION
The annual SBA picnic was held
early-i he semester- a the E-squire
Country Club. In contrast to former
years, the function took place early
enough in the day to enable those
present to participate in many outdoors
activities. In the evening the
students, faculty and guests were
served with an excellent buffet dinner,
followed by dancing which concluded
a most enjoyable and successful
event.
- (Continued"from Page 1)
Then in 1843 in the now famous
McNaghten's Case, the English House
of Lords set forth the "right and
wrong" doctrine, stating that if the
jury should find that the defendant
was laboring under such a defect of
reason, from disease of the mind, as
not to know the nature and quality
of the act he was doing, or being
rendered incapable of knowing right
from wrong, then the accused should
stand acquitted.
This law was soon accepted in the
United States, and is still the law in
nearly every state. The accused in
this year's National Moot Court Competition
case was indicted for murder
and convicted under the "right
and wrong" test. The defendant has
petitioned the Supreme Court to set
aside the conviction, contending that
the "right and wrong" test is obsolete
in light of the tremendous advancements
made in the field of psychiatry
since the McNaghten Case. Psychiatrists,
the defendant contends, are
pretty much in accord that a person's
personality is not made up of any one
controlling factor or element, but is
a conglomeration of many things, and
that a -pmson -m,a b able to -differentiate
between right and wrong
and yet be mentally deficient so as to
deserve legal sanction for his acts.
This theory was accepted in effect by
the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. District,
in 1954 in the controversial case
of Durham vs. U.S., but apparently is
getting no support from the other
courts.
The controversy is real; the human
Ken Anderson
- in-d -Is being Of eried up, atpl ~ ,.
and possibly even explained. Although
there is much remaining unanswered,
this much is true: knowledge of the
psychology of man has increased since
1843, but the law has remained the
same. The courts cannot take the
position that they will wait until the
whole pattern of man is explained before
changing their laws regardin£
insanity. This will never happen. The
courts must be resilient enough to
expand or change the law when it
is warranted. Whether that time is
now, or some time in the future can
be determined only by litigating the
matter until a just conclusion is reached,
or by tl1e legislature, in its infinite
wisdom, stating what the law shall be.
- - - - 0------
( Continued from Page 1)
planation of the nature of trauma and
pain, including the causes and different
degrees of pain.
Dr. E. A. Terry drew from his experience
as resident physician at the
local General Electric plant in discussing
the aggravation of pre-existing
conditions.
Last topic on the program was a
discussion of occupational diseases of
the professional man, by a panel including
Drs. H erbert Clay, -Arth ur
Schoen, Walter Coe and Hollis Johnson.
Lack of exercise, tension, and
irregularity of eating habits were
thought to be the most prevalent
causes of the occupational diseases.
Louisville Law Day concluded tl1at
night with a banquet in New Albany
in honor of Justice Sherman Minton,
recently retired from the Supreme
Court.
Non -Profit Org.
U. S. POSTAGE
PAID
LOUISVILLE, KY.
Permit No. 435
