Answer Happy

Case # 5 Kit Harington, a well-known actor, visited a physician,James O’Connor, who agreed to operate on Mr. Harington’s nose atthe Northshore hospital. During his visits, they entered into awritten agreement regarding the size, shape, and angle that thenose would be upon completion of the surgery. As part of theiragreement, Dr. O’Connor provided a 3-D printed representation ofwhat Mr. Harington’s nose would be upon the completion of thesurgery. Both parties agreed to the appearance of the 3-D printednose and they signed a written contract as to the appearance uponcompletion. The night before the surgery, Mr. Harington wasextremely nervous because he had a phobia of any sharp instrumenttouching his face. He found himself at a local bar, The TattooedMoose, drinking heavily. At some point in the evening he becamebelligerent and despondent and was asked to leave by the bouncer.He refused and the police were called to intervene. He eventuallymade it home but remained inebriated throughout the 6 night untilhe arrived at the Northshore for the procedure the next morning.When asked whether he had anything to eat or drank liquids besideswater in the eight hours before the procedure he said that he hadnot. Mr. Harington had provided blood work a week before theprocedure so his blood alcohol level was not detected before theprocedure. Upon completion of the procedure his nose appeared to beconcave at its midpoint, as well as flattened, bulbous, andasymmetrical at the tip. This outcome was a completely differentappearance than the one agreed to based on the 3-D printed exhibit.Mr. Harington filed suit within the State of Limitations. What isyour assessment based on Sullivan v. O’Conner 363 Mass. 579 (1973)and Guilmet v. Campbell 385 Mich. 57 (1971).
Questions: The name of the cause of action or what the lawsuitis about (e.g., negligence, battery, invasion of privacy,defamation, etc.). A very brief (2-3 sentences) summary of thefacts as it relates to the cause of action. The rule(s) that shouldbe applied. Include all elements of the rule if it has multipleparts. Define the rule with rule language from the text. How theplaintiff and the defendant would apply the rule for their side sothey will win their case at the trial level. How would theplaintiff argue? How would the defendant argue? Likely outcome ofthe case and your rationale. If applicable, include what yourrecommended for damages would be for each lawsuit