[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
June 22, 1901


JAMA. 1901;XXXVI(25):1787. doi:10.1001/jama.1901.02470250041007

About two years ago The Journal noticed editorially the decision of a German court in regard to the liability of a surgeon for changing the operation while the patient was under anesthesia, and could not, therefore, be a consenting party. A similar case has just occurred in Chicago,1 where a woman sued a medical institution to which she had gone to be operated on for hernia. After the incision was made a state of affairs was revealed that required a more extensive operation to save life, and it was done accordingly. Suit was brought on the ground that the surgeon had exceeded his instructions and damages to the amount of $25,000 claimed. The court promptly decided that the surgeon was justified, and ordered a verdict for the defendant, but the case, it is said, will be appealed to the higher courts, which have so far never given out

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview