Mills vs Pate

1. Conclusion

1.1. Mrs. Mills was given a no-evidence summary judgment to her breach of express warranty

1.1.1. reversed and remanded

1.2. Many physicians make guarantees to patients that could lead to malpractice lawsuits

1.3. It is important to inform patients of the risks, possible outcomes, and benefits of treatments and procedures

1.4. Physicians practice evidence bases medicine but each patient should be evaluated on a case by case basis

1.4.1. what worked for one patient may to work for another patient

1.4.2. A procedure that provided excellent results for one patient may be another patient's nightmare

1.4.3. Depending on co-morbities, genetics etc a treatment or intervention that cures (or alleviates symptoms) in one patient may not do the same for another patient.

2. Analysis

2.1. Mills presented evidence of breach of warranty. Was said to be an appeal to her informed consent claim

2.2. Dr. Pate argues Mrs. Mills presented material fact

2.3. Dr. Pate did not meet the surgical medical standards (Dr. Gilliand did), and caused the patient injury and further unnecessary surgeries and costs

2.4. Dr. Pate's Quality of care was questionable because he did not provide the patient with the best surgical options and proper informed consent

2.5. Dr. Pate's limited quality of care did not lead to quality results. The patient was unsatisfied and obtained corrective surgical interventions from another surgeon.

3. rule of law

3.1. Breach of Warranty: "Physicians are susceptible to liability not only if they promise but fail to perform a certain service but also especially if they promise that their treatment will yield a specific result but does not" pg 125 of text

4. Issue before the court

4.1. Dr. Pates: No-evidence summary judgment appeal

4.2. Mrs. Mills: Lack of informed consent, breach of express warranty, negligence

4.2.1. inadequate mentioning of possible outcomes

4.2.2. No mentioning of needing future procedures

4.2.3. Didn't correct abdominal irregularities

5. Facts

5.1. Patient sued plastic surgeon for misrepresentation of surgical results

5.2. 12/2/1999 Dr. Pates performed the first liposuction procedure (abdomen, hips, flanks, and thighs)

5.2.1. Mrs. Mills didn't approve of the undisclosed outcomes and Dr. Pates suggested another surgery

5.3. 1/16/01 Dr. Pates performed second surgery for lower abdominal bilateral hip, flank liposuction and thigh lift.

5.3.1. The informed consent form disclosed the potential outsomes

5.4. Mrs. Mills did not like the results of the second surgery and consulted Dr. Gilliand who performed an abdominoplasty, thigh lift and body lift

5.4.1. Mrs. Mills approved of the results