Based on that assumption, they become prepared to concede. This does not mean that the plaintiff will prove facts which would implicate the surgeon. To be accurate, Captain of the Ship refers only to situations when a surgeon or obstetrician is held liable for the negligence of another healthcare provider, but the surgeon or obstetrician is entirely free of negligence. It does not refer to cases where the surgeon or obstetrician may have liability for something the surgeon or obstetrician has done. One reason for the confusion is that many cases involving vicarious liability come to the attention of an appellate court because one of the defendants has asked for summary judgment.
Summary judgment is a legal technique which is used to avoid trial.
The defendant says if you assume that everything the plaintiff says is true, there is still no way that the plaintiff can recover against the defendant because there is no legal theory which would entitle the plaintiff to a recovery. When the court receives a request for summary judgment, it must examine the plaintiff's case and assume that everything that the plaintiff claims is true. What often happens in a summary judgment case is that the court engages in a theoretical discussion of possible causes of action which the plaintiff might be able to use to prevail at trial. There are a number of theoretical ways a surgeon can be responsible when there is an anesthesia mishap. Even though a surgeon may be held responsible for an anesthesia mishap, it does not necessarily mean that the surgeon is being held vicariously liable for the negligence of the anesthesia provider.