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.

CONFIDENTIAL

Oct. 12, 2004

Personal Injury
Medical Malpractice
Dental Negligence

Confidential

Settlement –  $25,000

Judge

Patricia L. Collins

Court

L.A. Superior Santa Monica


Attorneys

Plaintiff

George Leung-Chu Young
(Law Office of George L. Young)


Defendant

Steven D. Davis
(Steven D. Davis Law Group APC)


Facts

The plaintiff, an 81-year-old retired surgeon, was referred by his dentist to an oral surgeon, the defendant Harold Hargis, for the extraction of tooth number 15 which had decayed and which required extraction. The plaintiff had not seen the defendant prior to the date of the surgery. On May 22, 2003, the plaintiff went to the University of California Los Angeles Medical Center to have the tooth extracted. During the procedure, however, the defendant inadvertently extracted tooth number 13, a healthy tooth. The plaintiff sued the defendant oral surgeon and the Regents of the University of California and alleged dental malpractice. The defense admitted liability but disputed the damages. Twenty years before the procedure, the plaintiff had lost tooth number 14. He also had a bridge implanted in the upper left quadrant of his mouth. He claimed that without tooth numbers 13 and 15, when it was eventually extracted, he lost the use of his bridge because there was no anchor tooth. The plaintiff claimed that he would require two implants and a new bridge in order to regain use of the left side of his mouth. The defense argued that the claimed damages were excessive. The defense also claimed that it was only responsible for replacing the tooth that was inadvertently extracted, not the plaintiff's bridge or any other implants.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded $60,000; the defense offered $5,000.


#98217

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

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