
    Connell v. Putnam.
    In case, for loss of service and expenses incurred in caring for and nursing the plaintiff’s child, he may recover for his own time spent in taking care of the child.
    Time spent hy the plaintiff stands on the same ground as money paid by him for medical attendance or nursing.
    Case, against the defendant, for injuries to the plaintiff’s son from the kick of the defendant’s horse, by reason whereof the plaintiff lost the service of his son, and incurred great expense in nursing and care.
    The defendant excepted to the instructions to the jury, that, if they found for the plaintiff, he might recover, in addition to the surgeon’s bill, the fair value of his own time while engaged in nursing and taking care of his son. Verdict for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial.
    
      Pike & Blodgett, Gould, and Rolfe, for the defendant.
    
      S. B. Page, W. T. Norris, and Donovan, for the plaintiff.
   Stanley, J.

The expense in effecting a cure includes, in addition to what was paid the surgeon, the necessary attendance and nursing— Sedgw. Dam. 642, note 1; Field Dam. 557 — and this expense of nursing and care is not confined merely to the money expended. If the plaintiff left his work and devoted his time and attention to the care of his injured son, no reason is apparent why the jury may not consider that as one item of the expense, as if the services had been performed by some one else and paid for by the plaintiff. His time and labor have been diverted from his ordinary avocations. That time may have been as valuable as money. The instructions were correct.

Judgment on the verdict.

Foster, J., did not sit: the others concurred.  