Facts

Plaintiff Julie Johnson, a realtor in her 60s, received dental treatment from defendant Stephen Bo. In 1988, defendant performed dental surgery on plaintiff, placing a crown on a molar, tooth #30. In 1999, defendant placed a crown on tooth #31. In late 2003, plaintiff begain feeling pain around both teeth.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff sued defendant for dental malpractice. She claimed his negligent treatment caused her to develop temporal mandibular disorder. She contended that defendant did not meet the standard of care in placing both crowns because they were set too low on the molars. Her prosthodontics expert testified that the crowns were visibly too low because, as a bite wing film shows, the bottom molars did not touch the top molars when plaintiff bit down.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that the bite wing film was being used for an improper diagnostic purpose. He asserted that bite wing films are X-rays used to detect cavities and not for bite measuring. It was invalid to conclude that the teeth did not touch because a dividing plate made it impossible for the teeth to touch. Defendant further asserted that after plaintiff's final treatment in December 2003, plaintiff was treated with 25 other dental experts. Orthodontists, prosthodontists, pain management specialists and dental surgeons could not corroborate her claim that temporal mandibular disorder was caused by the crowns.

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed the crowns caused her temporal mandibular disorder. As a result, she has limited jaw movement and pain, and has difficulty eating which has caused weight loss and malnourishment. Plaintiff claimed she is in constant pain and suffers from chronic headaches and depression. Between December 2003 and early 2006, plaintiff has had both crowns replaced twice, but claimed that the disorder persists. Plaintiff sought $100,000 in damages, including $11,000 in medicals specials to cover consults and crown replacements. She also sought $32,000 in future medical care costs for new crowns and root canal treatments.

Result

The jury returned a defense verdict.

Deliberation

four hours

Poll

12-0

Length

eight days