pages 185-190 in the text

Question 1

Harry Wort asked his doctor to remove a cyst from his face. His doctor, Diane Prey, removed the cyst without warning Harry about the possibility that he would have a 2 inch scar on his face after surgery. Dr. Prey now concedes that she was negligent in not warning Harry of the risk. She admits that she should have warned of the risk since it was a material risk.

Following the surgery Harry had a 2 inch scar on his face. Dr. Prey has presented expert testimony that most reasonable patients would consent to the surgery even if they had been informed of the risk of a scar.

The case arose in a jurisdiction that follows Scott v. Bradford, page 185. Aside from the amount of damages sustained, what, if anything, must Wort prove in order to win at trial?

Wort cannot win at trial. Since most reasonable patients would have consented to the surgery, Wort is acting unreasonably and therefore must lose.

Wort cannot win at trial. Since he cannot show that Dr. Prey performed the surgery in a negligent manner, he cannot recover.

Wort will recover at trial if he can show that he would not have consented to the surgery had he been informed of the risk.

Wort will recover at trial because he was injured by the defendant's act.