Christman v. Davis
Supreme Court of Vermont
889 A.2d 746 (Vt. 2005)
Christman (plaintiff) consented to a tissue graft procedure with periodontist Davis (defendant), but during the operation Davis instead performed only a flap procedure — a less invasive step that would have been required as part of the more invasive tissue graft procedure anyway; the flap procedure was unsuccessful, and Christman later needed the original tissue graft procedure after all. Christman sued for battery, arguing Davis performed an unconsented-to procedure, and the trial court granted Davis summary judgment.
Whether a doctor commits battery by performing a less invasive procedure than the one the patient consented to, where the performed procedure would have been a necessary preliminary step within the more invasive consented procedure.