Penis Amputee Receives No Damages in Kentucky Trial

Aug. 24, 2011— -- A unanimous jury ruled in favor of the Kentucky doctor who amputated a portion of Phillip Seaton's penis during an October 2007 circumcision to treat inflammation.

The jury unanimously found that Dr. John Patterson exercised appropriate care when he removed a portion of Seaton's penis after finding cancer and ruled 10-2 against Seaton's claim that Patterson did not properly obtain consent to him before removing his penis.

"We feel the interest of justice has been served," Clay Robinson, Patterson's attorney, told ABC News. "When you hear about someone going in for a circumcision and it turned into a partial amputation, there's going to be a reaction, but it was a pretty clear-cut case. There was no liability here."

Seaton signed a consent form for a routine circumcision. Within the signed forms, a disclaimer included language that recognized Patterson's right to perform any further surgery he deemed necessary if unforeseen conditions arose, Robinson said.

Seaton, 64, sued Patterson in 2008 for removing part of his penis without his permission. The trial got under way Monday in Shelby County, Ky., Circuit Court. Seaton and his wife, Deborah, sought more than $16 million in damages for "loss of service, love and affection."

Seaton's lawyer, Kevin George, told jurors this week that Seaton "doesn't feel like a man" without his penis, The Associated Press reported.

But Robinson said the surgeon felt he had no other options but to remove the penis immediately.

The tip of Seaton's penis "had the appearance of rotten cauliflower" because it was so inundated with cancer, Robinson told the courtroom on Monday. The defense attorney also told the jury that Patterson only removed about an inch of the penis during the initial surgery before another surgeon removed the rest of his penis at a later date.