 |
|
Practice Areas: Dental Malpractice
|
Gordon & Silber has developed
a particular sub-specialty in the defense of dental malpractice
claims, including cases dealing with dealing with crowns, bridgework,
extractions, periodontal treatment, root canal therapy, orthodontia,
TMJ dysfunction, paresthesia, fractures, cosmetic dentistry, implants,
informed consent issues, and referrals to specialists.
- Regularly serves as counsel for dentists insured by Medical
Liability Mutual Insurance Company, Medical Malpractice Insurance
Pool and Dentists' Advantage.
- Partner Steven Mutz,
exclusively dedicated to defending dental professionals.
- Unsurpassed trial record defending dental professionals.
Representative Cases
Defense Verdict Ill Fitting
and Bulky Crowns and Bridges
New York Supreme Court, New York County
Defendant's verdict in a case where the plaintiff claimed that
the crowns and bridges were unnecessary, ill fitting and bulky with
open margins. We presented evidence that a subsequent dentist permanently
cemented our insureds' crowns and bridge into place, demonstrating
they fit. Our expert testified the affected teeth had sealed margins,
except for one due to plaintiff's grinding, smoking, and
poor oral hygiene. We argued the alleged "bulkiness" was
subjective and, could have been corrected by 30 seconds of grinding.
Defense Verdict Bulky, Ill
Fitting Bridges, Negligent Periodontal Care
New York Supreme Court, Nassau County
Defendant's verdict in a case where plaintiff claimed that the
bridges she received were bulky and ill fitting and required repeated
and unnecessary re-insertion. She alleged inadequate periodontal
evaluation and treatment which caused her severe pain, pinching,
periodontal disease, infections, continuous bleeding, embarrassment
from bridges falling out in public, inability to eat anything but
soft food, potential future loss of teeth, years of subsequent treatment
and new bridgework with questionable prognosis.
We presented expert testimony that the bridges were properly fitted.
We challenged proximate cause with evidence that the crowns and
bridges were loosened by the patient's bruxism (grinding and clenching
habit). Proper evaluation and treatment was demonstrated by perio
charting, a perio consult by a board certified periodontist, scaling,
root planing, debridement, "rotary gingevectomies" during
prep, and prescribing of Periostat. With regard to the claim that
the bridges would fall out, we argued that the decision on the type
of cement used was based on the need for further adjustment. We
also presented evidence of the plaintiff's culpable conduct in the
form of poor oral hygiene and her abandonment of treatment for 1
3/4 years. Evidence was also presented of her pre-existing dental
conditions, missing teeth, and bone loss.
Defense Verdict Lack of Informed
Consent; TMJ, PTSS
New York Supreme Court, New York County
Defense verdict in case where plaintiff claimed lack of informed
consent regarding full upper and lower arch splint dental bridges
leading to plaintiff's teeth being reduced to "stubs",
TMJ, and post-traumatic stress syndrome. We presented evidence that
the subsequent dentist re-prepped the teeth so they could not have
been "stubs". We also had plaintiff's own psychologist
to testify that he had described himself as a "con man"
and a "whiner".
Defense Verdict Inadequate
Support for Bridges, Poor Fit
New York Supreme Court, Kings County
Defense verdict where plaintiff claimed she was fitted with bridges
despite being told they would be implants. She claimed inadequate
support for dental bridges, and poor fit. We presented evidence
that defendant properly made and inserted all restorations.
Defense Verdict Permanent
Paresthesia 50% of Body Due to Anesthesia
New York Supreme Court, New York County
Defense verdict where plaintiff claimed permanent paresthesia over
half her body after defendant dentist's administration of anesthesia.
We presented evidence that plaintiff suffered from hysteria, and
her claims were anatomically impossible based on the subject enervation
path of the affected nerve.
Summary Judgment Ill Fitting
Implants and Restorations; TMJ; Bone Loss, etc.
New York Supreme Court, New York County
Summary judgment dismissing the complaint where plaintiff alleged
that our client negligently installed implants and provided restorations
that were ill-fitting and failed to refer plaintiff to specialists,
causing bone loss, periodontium destruction, temporomandibular joint
(TMJ) syndrome, neuromuscular disturbance, loss of tooth structure,
sensitivity, loss of future teeth, as well as anguish and loss of
ability to chew properly and to engage in social activity. We moved
for an order of summary judgment arguing that the claims were barred
by the Statute of Limitations since they accrued more than 2 years
prior to the filing of the lawsuit. Plaintiff claimed that the statute
of limitations was tolled as a result of the continuous treatment
doctrine.
|