Dr. Fаrsight is а generаl practitiоner and has bоth adult and pediatric patients. One day Dr. Farsight fоrgets his glasses that he wears to address his farsightedness, meaning he has trouble seeing things close up, but decides to examine patients anyway despite a state regulation restricting the practice of medicine when the physician is experiencing a visual, physical or cognitive condition that can impact their capabilities unless the physician can take corrective action to minimize the impact (for example, eyeglasses). He sees Timothy, a 35-year old male, for his annual medical exam. Dr. Farsight notices a strange spot on Timothy’s arm and decides to perform a biopsy. He doesn’t tell Timothy that he’s having trouble seeing things close up or ask Timothy what the mark might be. Dr. Farsight sends the biopsy for testing, and the results come back: the spot is from a black permanent marker. Timothy’s child had drawn it on his arm without Timothy noticing! If Timothy decides to file a complaint for negligence against Dr. Farsight, which NEGLIGENCE DOCTRINE would be most helpful to Timothy in proving his case?