Robin, a 33-year-old college-educated woman, was diagnosed with breast cancer. She consulted a surgeon who recommended a radical mastectomy. She sought a second opinion from another surgeon, who also recommended a mastectomy. Subsequently, Robin was referred to an oncologist. The oncologist diagnosed inflammatory invasive duct carcinoma, a type of cancer that spreads rapidly, and that if left untreated will result in the death of the patient in 6 to 12 months. The oncologist recommended that Robin undergo chemotherapy, followed by surgery, followed by radiation therapy. At some point after visiting the oncologist, Robin became aware of Dr. Perot, who claimed to have had developed a new "cancer vaccine" that was available at the University Hospital. A Dr. Perot commercial explained that the procedure was "comfortable" and "effective" and that it could be received at this office within University Hospital nearby. Dr. Perot rented office space in the first floor of the University Hospital. Robin met with Dr. Perot who told her that his treatment could "cure" her. After hearing this, Robin made the decision to go with this treatment and forego other treatments. Robin signed an informed consent form that stated forty percent of patients experienced improved quality and length of life, and that some experienced up to a one-hundred percent improvement. Dr. Perot discussed the benefits, risks and alternatives with Robin. Dr. Perot told Robin that her medical plan may eventually cover the treatments, but that she first had to make payments up front. Robin paid around $20,000 out-of-pocket for Dr. Perot's treatments. After almost one year of regular treatments with Dr. Perot, Robin was hospitalized since she was having difficulty breathing. She was given intensive chemotherapy treatment. The chemotherapy failed to work; Robin continued to deteriorate, and eventually died "with her lungs full of tumors." Robin's family brought suit on her behalf. At trial, Robin's qualified expert, Dr. Isaacs, testified regarding Robin's medical records. He testified that it appeared Dr. Perot did not doa physical examination of Robin because there were no notes of such an examination in the records, something which Dr. Isaacs testified was surprising because he would have expected it of a doctor under the circumstances. Dr. Isaacs also testified that as part of her treatment, Dr. Perot gave Robin two chemotherapy drugs. However, according to Dr. Isaacs, those drugs were administered at such low doses that they could not have helped to decrease Robin's cancer, and that the particular drug combination used was abandoned decades ago.

Assess Robin's plausible claims against all relevant parties. Discuss possible defenses asserted by the defendant(s)