Friday, October 10, 2014

Mohr v. Williams case brief summary

Mohr v. Williams case brief summary

F: P: Mohr (patient)
D: Williams (ear specialist doctor)
TC returned a verdict in favor of the P. D filed motion for judgement notwithstanding the verdict, but the TC denied this motion, but granted a new trial on the ground that the damages were excessive. Both parties appeal.
P (ear patient) consulted D (ear specialist), concerning trouble with her right ear. On examining, D found a diseased
condition of the right ear, and P consented to an operation upon it. When she was unconscious under the anaesthetic, D concluded that the right ear was not serious to require an operation, but a more serious condition of the left ear. He
decided operation on left ear without receiving P’s permission.
What is the scope of consent? How much consent is given.
Not emergency situation here. Doctor could wake her up, and put it back her again.
Not want’s in my mind but the outerward. Consent is issue of fact, not the issue of law.
R: doctor, who has obtained the patient's consent for a specific operation, may not perform another operation on the patient w/o his/her consent
Co: consent can given by agency...but here family physician is not an agency.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...