JUDGE TO DIAGNOSE DOCTORS' TROUBLES

NZ Truth, Issue 1150, 15 December 1927, Page 7

JUDGE TO DIAGNOSE DOCTORS' TROUBLES

Medico Alleges Fraud Against Brother Practitioner

When the sale was completed he had asked for the books of account and there was a reluctance on Dr. Millar's part to hand them over. Eventually he had given plaintiff books covering the years 1922-23-24-25-26 upon which average income had been worked out. Plaintiff said that at Dr. Millar's dictation he had written down a number of items which he would be entitled to deduct when making out his income tax return. He came to New Zealand in May, 1925. Lawyer Richmond: Have you not been practically threatening Dr. Millar with the pains and penalties of the Income Tax Department and using that as a bludgeon to get costly damages out of him? Nothing of the kind. I am trying to prove that Dr. Millar did not have what he said he had to sell. I don't care what the income tax people get out of him. That is their look-out. Lawyer Fiddes: I want to explain that as I wanted to get the income tax returns put in by Dr. Miliar, i saw the Income Tax Commissioner and, without disclosing any names, asked if I could get the returns on a judge's discovery order. Lawyer Richmond asked if it was not correct that the figures Dr. Alexander had furnished snowing the average income of £9BB per year did not represent an investigation over all the books available to him after discovery had been made of other books. Plaintiff: The books given to me represented the books of the practice and they should represent every penny Dr. Millar took or had. Dr. Millar had not given him any slips representing cash receipts. Lawyer Richmond: You are complaining very bitterly about a lot of ticks which you say are misleading because they do not represent work "Youre Lucky"

done. Does not a doctor make a lot of calls he does not charge for? No ticks should be made for such calls. It is customary though. My doctor, for instance, does not always charge me a £l/1/- for calling on me and wishing me good-morning. Plaintiff * (amidst laughter): Oh, well, you are lucky! Dr. Alexander said that the ticks gave him the Impression that Dr. Millar was doing a third more work than he actually was doing. Lawyer Richmond: Do you suggest that Dr. Millar was preparing for you four years by putting bogus ticks in?— Whether he was preparing for four years or one day I don't know, but I suggest they are most,misleading and would deceive anybody. Do you suggest that Dr. Millar intended them as a fraud? 1 suggest they are a deliberate fraud. Plaintiff denies that he had told Dr. Millar that he had not put in a full income tax returns when he was in England. Referring to Dr. Alexander's statement of the items given him by Dr. Millar for income tax deductions, Lawyer Richmond asked did not this action make.the plaintiff feel that Dr. Millar v/as untrustworthy. The witness replied that he felt Dr. Millar was not to be trusted in everything, but •that at the time he had received those figures he, Dr. Alexander, had paid over £ISOO. "I could have seen at a glance had I looked at the books," added witness, referring to alleged misrepresentation of income," but I was a fool." Had not -Dr. Alexander lost a number of patients?" asked counsel. "I may have lost some and I may have gained some," was the answer. Lawyer Richmond left the tangled system with its bewildering figures that represents Dr. Millar's methods of book-keeping and got on to the subject of dogs. . . : 4 . ' "You are a great dog-fancier?" he suggested.

Respecting Sale of Practice

gfeuumummlmmimm mium mil ill I n '« iililiiilimm.uiiiiiiliiiuiimiiiiiiraimillimmmiiniiliiiiliiiliimimimiliiKir| || , (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) || ll TWELVE months after purchasing a medical practice and residence §§ |l * in Lake Road, Takapuna, Dr. William Arthur Alexander and his || ll wife, Linney Alexander, came to the conclusion that Dr. Ernest James || 11 Millar had fraudulently misrepresented the average income from the || 11 practice as well as the value of the house when it was built. The U SI practice was bought by the husband and the home by the wife. §1 il ll I Tmiiimimiumitiiiimiiiii mimiiiim iiiiiiiiiiinmii I I iiiiiiiHiiiiliHiiiiliiiiniiiiiiiiiiimiliiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiliiHiiiliiiimmmiiiiiiimwiiiiiiiiiiiHi»iiiiiiiHiiiiiiiiiiiiiHiiiiiiiiiiß| Saiiiiititiiituiii«iiiiiiiiliuiitiiiiliiiiiiiiiliililililtiillllliinillliimtmiilliiliiiitiiniiiiiiiiiniiiiiiniiiiiiMMiiMi«itißMMMMMiMtiiiMnHiimiMMiiii«iiiiiuiiiiii« iiiihni iiumiiiiiiimimiiiiiimiiuiimmti:

"Is the King.—is the Prince of Wales?" queried witness in turn. His Honor: We don't want to know anything about them, just answer the question. Plaintiff admitted that he had five dogs and they were of the thoroughbred class. He was prepared to swear that he'had not had a dog in his car iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiyiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 1

with him more than 26 times in 18 months.

He was prepared to swear that none of his women patients had voiced their aversion from him going to see them after handling his dogs. Dr. Alexander said he could not determine by looking at Dr. Millar's books whether he had lost any'of the

patients he had taken over from the latter. ' , Smiling' somewhat cynically he added that he had certainly noted one patient who had visited Dr. Millar 600 times in three years. Linney Alexander's evidence supported that of her husband's in regard to the value of the house and its condition and also in respect to certain conversations about practice. There followed a long examination by Lawyer Fiddes of an expert, Henry Walter Shove, public accountant, who had investigated the record books handed to Dr. Alexander, and certain other books which were not given him at the time the practice was purchased but which were made available on the judge's discovery order when the action was commenced. These latter records, it was , contended by the defence, proved conclusively that the allegations of fraud were untrue. It was also alleged that Dr. Millar had handed Dr. Alexander a book containing a record of cash received in respect of casual clients over a, given period within the four- years l on which the averages governing the . sale of the practice were, based. The amount received in this way made an appreciable difference in the aver- | age income' for that year. The defence alleged that Dr. Alexander had failed | to produce this book as well as oertain | slips. These statements were made I during the examination and cross - I examination of the witness Shove. I Shove said his examination of the books for three years before the sale i of the praotlce showed that the total oash receipts was £3644/11/6, giving a yearly average of approximately £1215. The figures pasted into the beginning of Dr. Millar'3 record for 1926 disclosed an average of £1450, or £235 more. x These latter figures had been in the book when handed over to Dr. Alexander after the completion of the sale. * * Earnings

After a good deal of argument cpncerning the books that had, or allegedly had not been made available on the discovery order and which plaintiff's counsel asserted he had not seen until they were produced in Court, it was decided to'permit the witness Shove to carry out further investigations with the additional books! Later, Shove slated that -his' further examination showed that for the year 1923 —the year on which he had spent the most time—Dr. Millar's figures showed £1487 whilst the figures he had arrived at were £1153 13s. So far as he had gone in his examination he could not establish a shortage of more than £4OO over the three years. A number of witnesses were called to show the value of the property at Takapuna. Lawyer Riohmond, opening his case, said that plaintiff had proved nothing in the way of fraud. His own witness called as an expert had shown that the average earnings were £1215, Plaintiff, he said, toad come into court actually knowing from a preliminary Investigation of the books that there hail been no misrepresentation, as the additional books made available proved the average to be much higher than the figures given_ in by Dr. Alexander. "The whole thing reeks of fraud on plaintiff's side. He has not brought before the court the records given him.. He has endea-. , vored to frighten the defendant into a big settlement," added'counsel. Judge' Reed informed Lawyer Richmond tha'tt he was satisfied there was a case for the defence to answer. "The evidence before me is that these books were practically handed over as representing the books with which the business had been conducted. Those books don't show anything like the amounts," lie added. "Why should only three books be handed over?" asked his honor. Lawyer Richmond, said the other books were not handed oyer because they held no record which would be of any use to Dr. Alexander. ;