Blackwell

Blackwell v. Hurst

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 589·46 Cal. App. 4th 939·54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 209·96 Daily Journal DAR 7246·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4600
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1996B090313California2,063 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stone, J.

Was the refusal of the trial court to give conditional res ipsa loquitur instructions to the jury prejudicial error in this dental malpractice case? We hold it was and reverse the judgment.

Wayne Blackwell appeals from a judgment in favor of respondent Roy G. Hurst, D.D.S., in a wrongful death action brought by Blackwell based on alleged professional negligence. Appellant asserts that the court erroneously refused to give instructions on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.

Facts

October 16, 1992, Marie Blackwell had an appointment with respondent who had been undertaking extensive restorative dental work on her. Several days earlier, he had cemented 26 crowns in her mouth, most with temporary cement to see how well they fit before permanently cementing them. Mrs. Blackwell, who routinely took several medications, appeared heavily sedated when she came to her appointment for respondent to recement the crown which had come off a tooth. While working on that tooth, respondent noticed that the crown on the adjacent tooth was also loose. As he was removing the crown, he dropped it on her tongue. He attempted to retrieve it but Mrs. Blackwell, who habitually breathed through…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.