Hawkins v. McGee

Facts

Hawkins had a considerable quantity of scar tissue on the palm of his right hand. It was the result of a severe burn caused by contact with an electric wire about nine years earlier. There was evidence that McGee, a doctor, repeatedly solicited Hawkins's father for the opportunity to perform the operation. In cross-examining McGee, Hawkins's counsel advanced the theory that McGee sought an opportunity to experiment on skin grafting, in which he had had little previous experience. There was also evidence that, before the operation was performed, Hawkins and his father went to McGee's office. Asked how long the boy would be in the hospital, McGee answered three or four days, not over four, and said that within a few days the boy could go back to work with a perfect hand. The court said those statements could only be construed as expressions of opinion or predictions about the probable duration of the treatment and his resulting disability, not promises. The only substantial basis of the claim was testimony that McGee also said, before the operation was decided upon, that he would guarantee to make the hand a hundred per cent perfect hand, or a hundred per cent good hand. Hawkins was present when those words were allegedly spoken. The operation removed the scar tissue from the palm and grafted skin taken from Hawkins's chest in its place.

Issues

1. Was the evidence enough to submit to the jury whether McGee contracted to give Hawkins a perfect hand?
2. What is the correct measure of damages for breach of a surgeon's warranty to produce a perfect hand?

Holding

The contract question was properly submitted to the jury: evidence that McGee repeatedly solicited the operation could let the jury find that, if he spoke the alleged guarantee, he meant it at face value. The damages charge was erroneous. The pain necessarily incident to the operation was part of the price Hawkins paid, and the true measure is the value to him of the promised good hand minus the value of his hand now, including incidental consequences fairly within the parties' contemplation when they made their contract.