This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

In the year 1771, by royal charter of George III., D was organized for the care and healing of the sick. D has devoted itself to that high task. It has no capital stock; it does not distribute profits; and its physicians and surgeons, both the visiting and the resident staff, serve it without pay. Those who seek it in search of health, are charged nothing, if they are needy, either for board or for treatment. The well-to-do are required by its by-laws to pay $7 a week for board, an amount insufficient to cover the per capita cost of maintenance. Whatever income is thus received, is added to the income derived from the hospital's foundation, and helps to make it possible for the work to go on. The purpose is not profit, but charity, and the incidental revenue does not change D's standing as a charitable institution. P came to D in January 1908. She was suffering from some disorder of the stomach. P was told that it would be $7 a week. P became an inmate of the hospital, and after some weeks of treatment the house physician, Dr. Bartlett, discovered a lump, which proved to be a fibroid tumor. Dr. Stimson advised an operation. The Drs suggested an ether examination of P. She consented but notified Dr. Bartlett, as she says, that there must be no operation. Ether was administered, and while she was unconscious a tumor was removed. P's testimony is that this was done without her consent or knowledge. Following the operation, and, according to the testimony of her witnesses, because of it, gangrene developed in her left arm; some of her fingers had to be amputated; and her sufferings were intense. P seeks to charge D with liability for the wrong. P sued D and a verdict was directed to D. That ruling was affirmed and P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.