Hawkins v. McGee
146 A. 641 · 1929
Facts
The plaintiff, who had scar tissue on his right hand from an electric wire burn suffered nine years prior, sought an operation from the defendant, a doctor. Before the operation, the defendant allegedly told the plaintiff and his father that he would "guarantee to make the hand a hundred per cent perfect hand." The plaintiff's counsel suggested the defendant solicited the operation to experiment on skin grafting, and the plaintiff and his father accepted the guarantee as an inducement for consent. The operation involved removing scar tissue and grafting skin from the plaintiff's chest. Following the operation, the plaintiff's hand was not "a hundred per cent perfect."
Procedural history
The case was tried before a jury, which received instructions on damages to which the defendant excepted. The trial court subsequently set aside the verdict, presumably applying the same erroneous rule of damages. This court reviewed the trial court's rulings, found the jury instruction on damages to be erroneous, and ordered a new trial.
Issue
Was the question of whether the doctor made a contractual guarantee for a "perfect hand" properly submitted to the jury? What is the correct measure of damages for a doctor's breach of a contractual warranty to produce a specific surgical outcome?
Holding
The question of whether the doctor made a contractual guarantee was properly submitted to the jury. The trial court's instruction to the jury on the measure of damages for breach of contract was erroneous. A new trial is ordered.
Rule
The purpose of contract damages is to place the injured party in as good a position as they would have been in had the contract been performed. For a breach of warranty in a surgical contract, the measure of damages is the difference between the value of the hand if it had been as warranted (e.g., "perfect") and its actual value in its present condition, including incidental consequences contemplated by the parties. Pain and suffering necessarily incident to the operation are not recoverable as damages for breach of contract, as they represent the plaintiff's consideration for the contract.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.