MEMO
To: Supervising Attorney
From: Paralegal
Date: May 21, 2015
Re: Brown v. Furlow,04-CV-5887
Our File No.5-987

Statement of Facts:
With due regards I wish to inform you about the physical and medical damage incurred to John Brown as a result of his ignorance towards the infection in his tooth. He went on a vacation after being recommended by his doctor Dr. Furlow that his tooth needed immediate treatment. The infection grew rapidly and feared to endanger his life. After being treated in the hospital for the injury and the pain he had to suffer significant monetary and medical expenses and so after getting discharged from the hospital he filed a suit against him. Furlow had been served with a complaint on the 1st of March, in response to the complaint filed against him he was …show more content…
Is the doctor obliged towards the physician?
e. Was the fault of the patient that the injury took place?
Answers:
The first is the negligence part where the physician has created an unreasonable risk of harm to the other person that has been realized in injury. To prove that the doctor was negligent or the patient was negligent it would not be important to consider whether the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff or otherwise. This injury has multiple causes. As there are multiple negligent actors in the case none of whom alone could have caused the injury but have contributed substantially to the injury, the courts shall hold them to be liable under the what is known as the
“Substantial factor” test. The substantial test relates to the fact that the act could have “substantially increased” or would have “materially increased” the risk that had been realized in the harm that took place.
There is also the aspect of the breach of fiduciary duty where a person enjoys certain discretionary powers over the other person due to significant amount of practical interests of the other person. In this case it is the doctor who enjoyed discretionary powers related with the medical