Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Mohr v. Williams

104 N.W. 12 (1905)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Mohr v. Williams

Minnesota Supreme Court

104 N.W. 12 (1905)

Play video

Facts

Williams (defendant) is a surgeon specializing in ear conditions. Mohr (plaintiff) came to Williams complaining of problems with her right ear. Williams examined her ear and found it to be partially diseased. He was unable to examine Mohr’s left ear at the time. Williams recommended that Mohr have an operation on her right ear. Mohr consented and was put under anesthesia. During the operation, Williams examined Mohr’s left ear and found it to be significantly worse than her right ear. He determined that her right ear was not as serious as he originally suspected, and that an operation on her left ear would be more beneficial. Williams did not obtain Mohr’s consent, but performed the operation on her left ear instead of her right. The operation was performed skillfully and successfully. After the operation, Mohr alleged that the operation greatly impaired her hearing, caused her serious injury, and was wrongful and unlawful. She brought suit against Williams for assault and battery. At trial, the jury awarded Mohr $14,322.50. The trial judge set aside the verdict as excessive and ordered a new trial. Both parties appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 518,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 518,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions and answers

Why is the issue different?

In the video the issues seem to be focused on consent while bellow it seems to be focused on Whether an absence of evil intent or negligence on the part of a defendant operates as a defense to the civil tort of assault and battery

Want to see this answer?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and get access to all answers in our Q&A database

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial

Tempor minim nulla id mollit ullamco consequat aliquip adipisicing irure officia tempor. Magna sit eiusmod laborum proident laboris ex sunt. Non labore ex officia irure qui et laboris aliqua in minim. Labore velit aliqua proident officia cillum occaecat dolore tempor. Ullamco in consequat labore amet laborum proident reprehenderit anim cillum excepteur. Elit do nostrud nisi excepteur sit dolor pariatur fugiat. Nisi incididunt incididunt do est velit excepteur enim excepteur incididunt mollit pariatur. Irure tempor non in esse do. Laboris eiusmod in ad ut enim est duis ad sint veniam eiusmod. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 518,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,300 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership