Miscellaneous

Are you kidding me?

You know, we get some ridiculous e-mails in the QuizLaw mailbag now and again from folks looking for legal advice; despite disclaimers that we can't dole out the legal advice, they ask anyway. And trust me, some of these e-mails are amazing. Yet, we've never published one, because even with name changes and what not, I don't want to mock these people. ...I'm a gentle soul like that.

But this one is different. This is the first time we've gotten an e-mail question which is so obviously a homework assignment. I mean, I didn't even have to change the names thanks to the typical law exam names already in place (and all the typos come from the original):

I have a question.... what do you think would be the outcome and why for the following case:

Dr green treats a patient for a broken ancle but fails to notice a bone protruting from the upper leg. He treated the patient, but because of his failure to notice the protruding bone, the mans leg became infected and had to be amputated. Green then Informed Dr. Blade, the hospitals surgeon of what needed to be done. During the surgery, Blade got mixed up and amputated the wrong leg, and when he found out, he then amputated the correct leg. Ned, the patient is sueing both Dr Green and Dr. Blade.

Please explain the tort that has been committed and the aruguments that can be used for Ned (the plaintiff) and the likely liability which can be imposed on each of the parties.

I mean, come on.

But I'll open the floor to our readers -- pray tell, what is the answer to our illustrious e-mailer's quandary?

Full post as published by Quiz Law on March 26, 2008 (boomark / email).