Paula and Dan were in a car accident. Paula sues Dan for negligence in the proper federal court. After the close of discovery, Paula brings a motion for summary judgment (MSJ) and Dan files an opposition. In support of her motion, Paula provides affidavits from ten eye witnesses to the car accident, all of whom state under oath that they saw Dan run a red light, which caused the car accident. Dan provides one affidavit from his wife, the passenger in his car who had drunk three glasses of wine an hour earlier, who states under oath that the light was green and Dan did not run a red light. Which of the following is correct?

Select one:

a. Because there is a disputed fact, the case must proceed to trial.

b. Because Paula has ten eye-witnesses and Dan only has one, Paula’s MSJ should be granted.

c. Dan’s one eye-witness is his wife, who might lie for her husband, and who also may have been intoxicated at the relevant time; therefore, the wife’s testimony should be disregarded as unreliable and Paula’s MSJ should be granted.

d. Both B and C

In 2019, Ms. Love visited the offices of Awesome Plastic Cosmetic & Laser Surgery Center, where she consulted with plastic surgeon, Thomas Awesome, M.D., regarding breast augmentation surgery. According to Ms. Love she informed Dr. Awesome that she wished to have her breast size increased. Specifically, she told him that she wanted to be a size 34C. Ms.Love asserts that Dr. Awesome assured her that the surgery would accomplish this goal.Dr. Awesome disagrees and states that he gave no assurances or guarantees regarding M.s Love’s post-operative breast size, other than to inform her that her "breasts would most likely be between a B and C cup post-operatively. Dr. Awesome explains that he never gives assurances or guarantees regarding breast size to any patient.

During the consultation, Ms. Love decided to undergo the procedure. She was given a six-page informed consent document. However, Ms.Lovey says that no one reviewed the document with her. She did read through the document as she was speaking to her husband on her cellular telephone. Ms. Love then initialed the first five pages of the document and signed the last page. It is undisputed that the document contains a disclaimer stating that Ms. Love acknowledged that "no guarantee has been given by anyone as to the results that may be obtained."

The surgery was scheduled for March 26, 2019. On that day, Ms. Love presented to Awesome’s office and was provided with another document, entitled "Consent to Operation," which again stated that no guarantees had been given regarding the outcome of the surgery. Although Ms. Love signed the document, she also reports that she was under the influence of drugs prescribed by Dr. Awesome and that the drugs made her so drowsy that her husband had to carry her in to the office.

Following the surgery, Ms. Love made follow-up visits to Dr. Awesome’s office. During one of those visits, she was give a piece of paper on which was written the size and style of bra that the doctor wanted Ms. Love to purchase. A review of the paper reveals that it had Dr. Awesome’s office address and telephone number type-set at the top. The paper had the following in hand-writing: "34C Cup Long Line Style 1805."

Ms. Love contends that following surgery and after-care, her breast size is less than a 34B. The surgery involved no complications, Ms. Love has healed well and has no medical symptoms or complaints. She filed suit against Dr. Awesome alleging claims for breach of oral contract.

Consider the case described above. Here is some more information: Remember how Dr. Awesome prescribed her drugs that made her unable to walk, such that her husband had to carry her? When Ms. Love read through her own medical record she found a notation by one of the nurses (who just happened to be Ms. Love's neighbor). That notation said, " Patient appears to be intoxicated; I have seen this behavior before and she is an alcoholic". Ms. Love is very upset by this statement. She tells you that she never drinks and that her altered state was due to the prescribed medication. Could Ms. Love sue the nurse for defamation? Are there any other intentional torts that could be alleged by Ms. Love based on the nurse's statement? What would she need to prove to succeed in such claims?