Case Name: URBANEK v. STOTTER
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1926-11-01
Citations: 5 Ohio Law Abs. 736
Docket Number: No. 6715
Parties: URBANEK v. STOTTER
Judges: (Sullivan and Vickery, JJ., concur.)
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 5
Pages: 736–736

Head Matter:
URBANEK v. STOTTER
Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist., Cuyahoga Co.
No. 6715.
Decided Nov. 1, 1926.
E. W. Dissette and Frank A. Green, Cleveland, for Urbanek.
Cook, McGowan, Foote, Bushnell & Burgess, Cleveland, for Stotter.

Opinion:
LEVINE, PJ.
Paulina Urbanek alleged that Doctor James Stotter, in removing her tonsils, removed more of the tissues surrounding the tonsils, than was necessary in such operation. The physician denied this, and claimed that, because of a diseased condition of affected areas adjacent to the tonsils, he removed the tissues. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr. Stotter.
"Where an unauthorized surgical operation is performed on a patient, the law presumes damages, and, in addition, will sanction punitive damages in a proper case."
The evidence disclosed, and the jury was undoubtedly justified in finding, that Dr. Stot-ter lemoved only such portions of the surrounding tissues as were so infected as to require their removal. Practically all the medical testimony offered is to the effect that every surgeon would feel duty bound to remove diseased tissues surrounding tonsils.
(Sullivan and Vickery, JJ., concur.)