Hawkins v. McGee
84 N.H. 114, 146 A. 641 (1929)
The hairy hand: a surgeon's guarantee of perfection, and a worse hand
- In one lineEn una línea
- Damages for a broken promise of a perfect hand are the difference between the hand promised and the hand delivered, not the operation's pain.Los daños por incumplir la promesa de dejar una mano perfecta son la diferencia entre el valor de la mano prometida y el de la entregada, no el dolor y sufrimiento de la operación.
- RuleRegla
- The purpose of contract damages is to give the injured party the value of what he would have received had the contract been performed; the measure is the difference between the value of the promised performance and the value of what was delivered, plus incidental losses, excluding pain and suffering the plaintiff agreed to bear as part of the bargain.
- Why this case is herePor qué está aquí este caso
- The first remedies case (Part VII): expectation damages put the plaintiff where he would have been had the promise been kept, the difference between the hand promised and the hand received, not pain and suffering he agreed to undergo and not the hand's value before surgery.
- Procedural posturePostura procesal
- Patient sued the surgeon for breach of a promise to make his hand perfect; verdict for the patient; the court set aside the verdict because the jury was wrongly instructed on damages, and ordered a new trial.
Facts
George Hawkins had a scarred palm from a childhood burn. Dr. McGee, who wanted to try skin grafting, told the boy’s father he would guarantee to make the hand a hundred percent perfect. The graft, taken from the chest, left the hand hairy and worse than before.
Procedural posture
Verdict for the plaintiff on the contract claim (the negligence claim failed). The trial judge found the damages excessive; on appeal the court held the jury had been misinstructed and ordered a new trial on damages.
Issue
What the measure of damages is for breach of a promise to achieve a specific medical result.
Holding
The difference between the value of a perfect hand, as promised, and the value of the hand after the operation, plus any incidental consequences within the parties’ contemplation; not the pain of the operation and not the hand’s value before surgery.
Reasoning
The court analogized to a machine sold with a warranty: the buyer recovers the difference between the machine as warranted and as delivered. The patient bargained for a good hand at the cost of an operation; the breach is the shortfall in the result, and the damages must measure that shortfall.
Rule (own words)
Contract damages look forward: what you were promised, minus what you got. What you agreed to suffer to get it is not part of the loss.
What-ifs
- The surgeon merely said he hoped for a good result: no promise; only a negligence claim.
- The patient also lost wages because the hand was unusable: consequential damages if within contemplation.
- Sullivan v. O’Connor facts: a court may let the patient elect reliance damages (the pre-operation value, the fee and pain from unnecessary operations) when expectation is hard to prove.
Likely follow-upsRepreguntas probables
Was there a contract at all?
Why exclude pain and suffering?
What did the plaintiff actually get?
Say the answer out loud before revealing each part. Rate yourself honestly; the case comes back sooner when you miss.Di la respuesta en voz alta antes de revelar cada parte. Califícate con honestidad; el caso vuelve antes si fallas.
Panic kit: “Could you repeat the question, please?” · “Let me make sure I have the facts right: …” · “I'm not certain, but I'd argue … because …”Kit de pánico: “Could you repeat the question, please?” · “Let me make sure I have the facts right: …” · “I'm not certain, but I'd argue … because …”