Estell v. Barringer

This is a medical malpractice case in which the theory of the plaintiff-appellant is apparently: “The law ought to be # *

But — in Illinois, it isn't.

As originally filed, the case was constructed on three footings— res ipsa loquitur, negligence and lack of consent. The trial court dismissed the res ipsa theory and the case went to jury trial on the remaining two theories. At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, the corut directed a a verdict in favor of defendant, and this appeal follows. The question as to lack of consent is not raised, and we are faced squarely with the questions: Does the…