Kokemoor, a neurosurgeon, for a consultation on the cause of her headaches. Dr.
Kokemoor performed a CT scan and determined that her headaches were the result of a posterior basilar bihrcation aneurysm. He performed surgery and, although the surgery was technically succ&I, Johnson was rendered an incomplete quadriplegic. She is unable to walk, has no bowel or bladder control, and her vision, speech, and upper body coordination are impaired. Prior to surgery she suffered from no neurological impairments.
The plaintiffs version of the facts leading up to the surgery varies significantly from the defendant's version. She maintains that Dr. Kokemoor stated that her aneurysm was growing rapidly and that she needed the surgery on an emergency basis. According to Johnson, Dr. Kokemoor described the surgery as having a 2 percent risk of a bad outcome, that it was less risky than the angiogram that she would need to have, and that it was no more risky than an appendectomy or a tonsillectomy. She states that, when asked, Dr. Kokemoor told her he had performed the procedure dozens of times.
Dr. Kokemoor contends that he never told
Johnson that the risk of this procedure was comparable to that of an angiogram, and that he discussed the risks of appendectomies and tonsillectomies to dqonstrate to her that no surgery is without risk. He denied that he told her that it was an emer-gency procedure. He also testified that the