
    CONTRACT FOR. SERVICES OF PHYSICIAN HELD INVALID.
    Circuit Court of Hamilton County.
    Robert Chambers, Executor, v. Dr. S. J. D. Meade.
    Decided, December 14, 1912.
    
      Pleading — Issue Raised by a General Denial — Charge of Court as to Evidence which May Be Disregarded — Contracts.
    It is error to charge a jury that they have the “right to disregard any evidence that you choose and consider that only which appeals to your sense of justice and fairness.”
    
      Ernst, Cassatt .& Cottle, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Millard Tyree, contra.
    The plaintiff below sued for $500 for professional services, and was given a verdict in full, with interest.
    Jones, J.; Smith, P. J., and Swing, J., concur.
   There is no evidence that the proposition made by Mr. Chambers was accepted or assented to by Dr. Meade. Hence, the verdict below was sustained by the evidence and the judgment must be reversed.

In the general charge we find the following statement:

“No issue is raised whatever by the defendant executor. His answer is a-mere general denial.”

And on the same page:

“You have the right to disregard any evidence that you choose and consider that only which appeals to your sense of justice and fairness. ’ ’

The exact language last quoted was found to be erroneous in Rosenthal v. Schreiber, See Court Index of May 27, 1912.

To say that'a general denial raises no issue is so clearly erroneous as to mahe comment unnecessary. It may not have been prejudicial here.  