Mrs. Jones consulted a surgeon for a serious peptic ulcer.The surgeon, Dr. Doright, recommended an operation known as a vagotomy.Mrs. Jones' essentially uncontroverted testimony was that Dr. Doright told her, "Once you have the operation, it takes care of all your current troubles.You can eat as you want, drink as you want, you can go as you please."In response to further questioning, Mrs Jones testified:

Well, he explained to me how they perform this operation, and that at that time he told me that him and his associate, Dr. Alright, were specialists, and there was nothing to it at all.It was a simple operation according to them.

Did he talk to you about whether he had performed these [surgeries] before?

Yes, he did ... I asked him how often.He said, "Very often."

Any discussion as to complications or problems that may arise, that can result?

I asked him about it, how long I'd be out of work.He said approximately four weeks at the most, and I asked him about any complications, anything dangerous.He said, "No, there is no danger in this operation."

What was the discussion about the future use of medicine?

Well, he said that after this operation, "you can throw your pillbox away, your Maalox you can throw away."...

The surgery was performed properly, but a "ruptured esophagus due to surgical trauma in doing the vagotomy with bilateral effusion and mediastinal emphysema and mediastinitis" resulted.This led to three subsequent surgeries, transfusion-related hepatitis, loss of 80 pounds, sleep disorders, scarring, loss of her job, recurrent infections, physical weakness and social inactivity.

Mr. and Mrs. Jones have sued Dr. Doright and Dr. Alright.Will they be successful?On what basis?What damages would they receive if Successful?Please explain your answer