Is A liable for battery if she examines B without consent while B is under anesthesia?

The correct answer is that A is liable for battery because examining B without consent while B is under anesthesia constitutes an offensive touch. In tort law, battery is defined as the intentional and unlawful use of force against another, resulting in harmful or offensive contact. Consent is a crucial element in determining the legality of physical touching, especially in medical settings.

In this scenario, B is incapacitated due to anesthesia and cannot provide informed consent. Even if A is a medical professional, the standard of care in medical practice still requires obtaining consent from the patient before proceeding with any examination or treatment. Since B did not consent to the examination, A's actions are deemed offensive under the law, leading to liability for battery. The focus here is on the lack of consent and whether the contact was offensive, which it is, given the circumstances surrounding B's incapacity to agree to the examination.

Considering the other options: while being a medical professional typically allows for certain examinations during normal procedures, this does not apply when there is no consent from the patient. Simply being a professional does not absolve one from the necessity of obtaining consent. Regarding the notion that harm must occur or that consent is implied in medical procedures, these do not accurately pertain to the requirement of explicit consent