Reference no: EM133381592

Case Study: Dr. PR has become increasingly concerned about the diminishing revenues of his general dermatology practice. Although in practice for only 5 years, he was never particularly interested in dermatologic surgery during his residency. He has considered bringing various laser techniques into his practice; however, he has always been wary of physicians performing procedures with which they are not comfortable. Recently, he attended an evening workshop about energy-based-device treatments and was impressed with the data on safety, efficacy, and ease of performance. Although multiple treatment sessions were usually required, all the presented slides at the meeting showed uniformly good results.Dr PR recognizes the advantages of starting with laser hair removal and begins to consider doing some marketing, which he has never done before. He wants to focus on the advantages of laser hair removal. He ponders the substance of his ad. He wishes to stress no more tweezing, no more waxing, no more shaving, and no more depilatories, and that other techniques may be more painful, are a nuisance, and are only temporary. He knows that relative to laser hair removal, electrolysis is old fashioned. Laser hair removal, he is led to believe, can be marketed as a technique that does not require years of treatment.With this in mind, Dr PR purchases the aforementioned laser and begins to run ads in his local paper. He has never used newspaper advertising before, and the ad department guides him through the process. The ads emphasize all the points made in the laser workshop Dr PR attended. The ads run for several weeks but, unfortunately, the response is not anywhere near what would be necessary to cover Dr PR's laser lease payments. Frustrated with his return on investment, Dr PR contacts a local ad agency for advice. He discusses the advantages of his laser with the ad representative. The representative suggests that his marketing should highlight the following statement: "Permanent hair removal after 1 treatment." Dr PR is concerned about this wording. It is not exactly in line with his understanding of the purchased laser's results. The ad representative reassures him that stretching the truth is not unusual in advertising; it is considered hyperbole and should be nothing to worry about.The ad runs and the response is remarkable. Mr. Doe, who is concerned about the excessively thick hair on his back, sees the ad. Based on the ad's claim, he spends $1000 for 1 laser hair removal treatment with Dr PR. Unfortunately, all the hair has returned 3 months after the 1 laser session. Mr. Doe returns to Dr PR's office and expresses his concern about the lack of response to the treatment. Dr PR assures him that such a response is not unusual and suggests that more laser treatments will lead to better results. Mr. Doe believes Dr PR's ad misrepresented the reality of laser hair removal efficacy. He demands a refund of his $1000. Dr PR, frustrated with his economic difficulties, refuses to refund the money. Mr Doe seeks legal advice and sues Dr PR for misrepresentation and fraud.

Questions: Answer the folloiwng questions:

A. List the three elements that need to be proven in order to win a misrepresentation case. (Hint: See "Misrepresentation" slide in Powerpoint for Chapter 7)

B. For each of these three elements, explain whether that element can be proven in this case. Explain.

C. What additional element is needed to prove the misrepresentation is fraudulant? Is it present in this case?

D. Based on your analysis above, who will win this case, Dr PR or Mr Doe? Explain,