Mohr v. Williams

a.       P was advised by ear doctor, D, to get a surgery on her right ear. Upon further inspection, during the surgery, D noticed the left ear was in worse condition than the right. So he performed the surgery on the left ear.

b.      P claimed battery because D did not have consent to perform (act) on the left ear, thus constituting unlawful contact. P was found to be Liable.

c.       Was consent necessary?

                                                              i.      If consent is necessary, D is Liable. If consent is not necessary, D is Not Liable.

                                                            ii.      Consent is necessary for something like a surgery. It is up to the patient as to whether or not they want to take their chances with the surgery.

                                                          iii.      P’s life was not threatened by the ear impairment…and even if it was, he “wrongly” found the impairment by deviating from the consented procedure.