Mr. Hart, will you recite the facts of Hawkins versus McGee? I do have your name right. You are Mr. Hart? Yes, my name is Hart. You're not speaking loud enough, Mr. Hart.
Will you speak up? Yes, my name is Hart. Mr. Hart, you're still not speaking loud enough. Will you stand? Now that you're on your feet, Mr. Hart, maybe the class will be able to understand you.
You are on your feet? Yes, I'm on my feet. Loudly, Mr. Hart. Fill this room with your intelligence.
Now, will you give us the facts of the case? I haven't read the case. Class assignments for the first day are posted on the bulletin boards in Langdell and Austin halls.
You must have known that. No. You assumed that this first class would be a lecture. Introduction to the course. Yes, sir.
Never assume anything in my classroom. Mr. Hart, I will myself give you the facts of the case. Hawkins v. McGee is a case in contract law, the subject of our study. The boy burned his hand by touching an electric wire. A doctor who was anxious to experiment in skin grafting asked to operate on the hand, guaranteeing that he would restore it.
100%. He took a piece of skin from the boy's chest and grafted it onto the unfortunate boy's hand. The operation failed to produce a healthy hand. Instead, it produced a hairy hand.
A hand not only burned, but covered with dense, matted hair. Mr. Hart, what damages do you think the doctor should pay? What did the doctor promise?
There was a promise to fix the hand back to the way it was before it was burned. And the result of the operation? The hand was much worse than before he went to the doctor.
How should the court measure the damages? What should the doctor pay the boy? The doctor should...
The doctor should pay for what he did. I should pay for the difference between what the boy had, a burned hand, and what the doctor gave him, a burned and hairy hand? Mr. Pruitt!