I came across an interesting article. Now believe me, I hate when people sue over stupid lawsuits. Like the lady who sued McDonald’s because her coffee was too hot, but this particular lawsuit, the man should get infinite money.

Here is this gist of it: 61-year-old Phillip Seaton went in to get surgery on his penis for a circumcision. That is just weird in itself. He is 61 years late on that surgery. When Dr. John Patterson performed the procedure he found cancer, and amputated Seaton’s penis. WHAT!?!?

Patterson might as well took his scalpel to Seaton’s throat if he was going to take away Seaton’s penis. What is the point of living after that? I always said if my mini-me doesn’t work anymore then there is no reason to live.

According to the lawsuit Seaton “has suffered mental anguish, pain, and has lost the enjoyment of life.” I would have to agree with that. Seaton also filed a lawsuit against Dr. Oliver James who administered the anesthesia, because Seaton never gave permission to receive the anesthesia. Now I don’t know if I believe the second part, because I have my penis being operated on, I want to be as high as possible and not feel a thing.

So if you were in Seaton’s position what would you sue for? Here is what I would do. I would file a lawsuit against Patterson for $1 billion AND to see that “Eye for an Eye” gets put into play. It’s only fair.

Think about what a penis means to a man. How many guys do you see sit on the couch with their hands in their pants. It is because his penis is his best friend. The penis is the focal point of every word battle between guys. “Yea well you got a small wang.” “I will slap you in the face with my cock..after I unravel it.”

Poor Phil can’t get into anymore word battles.

Phil: “I could beat your ass anyday.”

Random guy: “Yea right, you got a mangina.”

Phil: “….” silence. He can’t say anything once his penis gets brought up. Phil’s best friend: “My wife is making me get Viagra.” Phil: “At least you have a reason to take it.” Poor Phil.

Think about his wife. This affects her almost equally. She is now going to have to work on her lemonade skills for the pool boy. In addition, when she goes to her weekly book club where they complain about their husbands, she is the key-note speaker now.

Can you even put a monetary value on this? I say close to billion dollars, from EACH doctor, and the wife gets to sue too. But I really think if this lawsuit is going to be fair, both doctors should lose their manhood.

Could you imagine if the doctors did this as a sick joke? They would have an upper management role reserved in hell if that is the case. After seeing that movie “Awake” with Jessica Alba and then reading this story, I will never get surgery. Once again, poor Phil.

(Editor’s note: Penis.)

Phillip Seaton, 61, went into hospital for a circumcision. When he awoke after surgery he found that his penis had been cut off. He and his wife, Deborah, have filed a lawsuit seeking unspecified compensation and also unspecified punitive damages for the removal of his penis. They claim that the penis was amputated without consulting either Phillip or Deborah Seaton, or giving them an opportunity to seek a second opinion. See the TV coverage here.

Being sued are:

• Dr. John M. Patterson, who performed the surgery
• Commonwealth Urology, where the procedure took place
• Dr. Oliver James – Anaesthesiologist for use of general anaesthesia, when Seaton had specifically asked for it not to be administered.

In the lawsuit, filed in Kentucky State Court, the couple claim “loss of service, love and affection.” Phillip Seaton claims he has suffered mental anguish, pain, and has lost the enjoyment of life. The lawsuit states that Dr. Patterson received consent to perform a circumcision and only a circumcision, and that Seaton did not consent to his penis being removed.

The Seaton’s lawyer, Kevin George, said Dr. Patterson amputated the organ after finding cancer, but he only had consent to remove the foreskin.

“Sometimes you have an emergency and you have to do this, but he could very easily closed him up and said, ‘Here are your options. You have cancer,’ and the family would have said, ‘We want a second opinion. This is a big deal,’” George said.

Dr. Patterson’s attorney, Clay Robinson, of Lexington said the procedure was ‘medically necessary’ and authorized by the patient. He said Dr. Patterson performed the surgery because the patient, 61-year-old Phillip Seaton, had cancer and had already given permission to perform any medical procedure deemed necessary. The doctor’s post-surgical notes show the doctor thought he detected cancer and removed the penis. Attorney Kevin George said a later test did detect cancer.

The Seatons’ suit is similar to one in which an Indianapolis man was awarded more than $2.3 million in damages after he claimed his penis and left testicle were removed without his consent during surgery for an infection in 1997.