This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Dental Malpractice
Negligence

Krista A. Anderson v. Harold J. Kristal, D.D.S.

Published: Aug. 2, 1997 | Result Date: Feb. 4, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: C9500018 Verdict –  $0

Judge

Barbara Zuniga

Court

Contra Costa Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Mark A. Goodman


Defendant

Michael S. Treppa


Experts

Plaintiff

Roy Lewis
(medical)

Richard Cohan
(medical)

Defendant

Warden H. Noble
(medical)

Facts

Between June 1994 and February 1995, plaintiff Krista Anderson, a 63-year-old home care provider from Walnut Creek, was treated by the defendant dentist for full mouth dental reconstruction. The original treatment plan was modified, allegedly at the plaintiff's request, and the second treatment plan failed. Multiple crowns and bridges failed and two of the plaintiff's teeth fractured near the gum line. All of the full mouth dental reconstruction had to be redone. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on a negligence theory of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $175,000. The defendant made a settlement offer of $15,000.

Damages

The plaintiff asked the jury for $175,000 in damages.

Injuries

The plaintiff claimed that she required additional root canals and the full mouth dental reconstruction had to be redone. She also claimed that subsequent tooth loss will need to be corrected by implants.

Other Information

EXPERT TESTIMONY: Plaintiff's expert Dr. Roy Lewis testifed that he discovered extensive decay that was left untreated and that the plaintiff's teeth were unprepared for crowns and bridges. Plaintiff's expert Richard Cohan testified that it was below the standard of care not to remove all existing decay, adequately prepare the teeth for prosthodontic devices and to establish the plaintiff's occlusion. Dr. Cohan also testified that the materials utilized by the defendant (gold and porcelain) indicated that the devices were intended to be permanent and not temporary. Defendant's expert Warden Noble testified that treatment methods employed by the defendant, although not universally followed in the dental community, were recognized as acceptable alternatives and were within the standard of care for the placement of temporary restorations.

Deliberation

4 hours

Poll

_______ (#s pls.)

Length

7 days


#124115

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390