Problem
Analyze a complex set of facts using the legal understanding of torts we've studied; the idea is to apply the concepts of duty, breach, causation, proximate causation, defenses, strict liability, and so on. This is how lawyers are tested, and the goal in part is to encourage you to exercise "thinking like a lawyer." You can also conceive the problem as figuring out how to identify, or "spot," legal issues.
In the middle of a Delta flight across the country, the pilot notices that the heater for the part of the cargo hold that contains passengers' animals has failed. Unfortunately, the hold contains two dogs and three cats. As it happens, one of the dogs is particularly frail and is on its way to an animal hospice that takes care of dogs that are about to die.
The pilot faces a choice: she can land the plane, costing Delta hundreds of thousands of dollars and delaying the 120 passengers by several hours, or she can continue the flight, posing a grave risk to the pets in the cargo hold. She estimates, roughly correctly, that each pet has a 50% chance of living if she continues the flight normally. Her radio, which, like the cargo heater, is a standard part of the Boeing airplane she's flying, appears to have failed, so she has to make a decision without contacting anyone else. She chooses to continue the flight normally. At the end of the flight, both of the dogs and one of the cats are found dead.
Not quite relatedly, Boeing has been researching the health risks of cosmic rays upon airline pilots. Because the protection from the atmosphere is decreased at 30,000 feet, people on airplanes experience exposure to ionizing cosmic rays at a level much higher than people on the ground, leading to a slightly increased risk of cancer that rises as exposure rises. About 20 per 100,000 people in the general population get melanoma, but the risk is about twice as high in airline pilots.[1] Boeing is aware of this information but does not disclose it to airlines, pilots, or passengers. With current technology, Boeing could prevent this problem by using special shielding, but this will make airplanes significantly more expensive both to build and to operate. A few months after the incident with the pets above, the pilot develops a suspicious skin tumor near her eye.
At the hospital, the pilot is treated by a dermatological surgeon. The surgeon tells the patient, "Whenever I see a skin lesion like this, I have to operate, because there's a significant chance it's melanoma. Okay?" The pilot responds, "Okay," and quick, office-room surgery is performed. The surgery harms the pilot's vision in one eye, disqualifying her as a pilot. Based on the evidence from the doctor's initial examination, which was performed competently, most doctors would have agreed that surgery was necessary. It turns out that the lesion was not in fact dangerous and didn't need to be removed. The surgery was performed competently.
While sitting in a chair just inside the hospital's entrance waiting for a taxi to drive her home, the chair collapses, causing serious injury to the pilot's back. It is not clear why the chair collapsed, but it was quite old, and the hospital has not recently inspected it.
Discuss the merits of all plausible tort claims raised by this scenario.