Dental Malpractice Lawsuit Against Edward Christensen and Christensen Oral Surgery Continues
Dental Malpractice Lawsuit Against Edward Christensen and Christensen Oral Surgery Continues
Last week, the court issued an order in a dental malpractice case filed by Scottsdale Injury Lawyers, LLC. The Order was issued by Judge Bachus in a lawsuit filed against Edward Christensen DDS and his dental practice doing business as Christensen Oral Surgery. The Order denied in part Defendant Christensen’s Motion to Compel Compulsory Arbitration and for Plaintiff to Provide a Preliminary Expert Affidavit.
Christensen took the position that the case was valued at less than $50,000. Christensen set forth in his motion that “any alleged damages, which are not admitted, are substantially less than $50,000.” As a result, Christensen sought to have the case sent to compulsory arbitration. The Court’s order denied the request.
The Filing of the Dental Malpractice Lawsuit
The dental malpractice lawsuit was filed earlier this year against Christensen and his dental practice. The lawsuit was filed in Maricopa County Superior Court and designated case number CV 2022-050555. Christensen and Christensen Oral Surgery are located in Mesa, Arizona.
The Allegations in the Dental Malpractice Lawsuit Against Christensen
The dental malpractice lawsuit filed against Christensen alleges that he extracted the wrong tooth from the client’s mouth. Specifically, that Christensen extracted a permanent molar when he was supposed to extract a wisdom tooth instead. The lawsuit alleges that, as a result of Christensen’s negligence, the client suffered damages including the loss of his permanent tooth.
The lawsuit alleges that the client was forced to undergo an implant procedure to replace the wrongfully removed tooth. Other court filings, set forth that Plaintiff had to undergo a subsequent wisdom tooth extraction to remove the tooth that was originally supposed to be removed. Finally, court filings alleged that the client will require future dental treatment and care including the implantation and upkeep of a prosthetic tooth.
The Verbatim Allegations from the Lawsuit
The main allegations from the lawsuit are set forth below verbatim:
- On March 29, 2019, Plaintiff presented to Christensen Oral Surgery on a referral from his family dentist to have his wisdom teeth extracted. Specifically, Plaintiff was to have his #1, #16, #17, and #32 teeth extracted from his mouth.
- On the aforementioned date and time, Plaintiff was placed under general anesthesia and Defendant, Edward Christensen, attempted to perform the procedure as planned.
- After the procedure, Plaintiff regained consciousness and was advised by Christensen that all of his wisdom teeth had been successfully extracted. As a result, Plaintiff was discharged that same day.
- Unbeknown to Plaintiff at the time, Christensen had extracted an incorrect tooth. Instead of removing Plaintiff’s #17 tooth, Christensen removed Plaintiff’s #18 tooth—a permanent molar.
- Plaintiff was unaware of Christensen’s error until he presented to his family dentist on November 10, 2020. On this date, Plaintiff’s family dentist, Dr. Derrick Dickerson, advised Plaintiff that Christensen had removed an incorrect tooth and that Plaintiff’s #17 tooth was still intact.
- On April 7, 2021, Plaintiff presented back to Christensen Oral Surgery. On this date, Plaintiff had his #17 tooth extracted and received an artificial dental implant where his #18 tooth once was. …
- At the time of the aforementioned events, it was the duty of Defendants to exercise reasonable care and caution so as not to injure Plaintiff, but Defendants disregarded this duty and negligently extracted an incorrect tooth causing severe, painful and permanent injury to Plaintiff.
- Defendants breached the aforementioned duty they owed to Plaintiff and were then and there guilty of failing to provide adequate and safe dental treatment to Plaintiff.
- In so doing the above, Defendants failed to exercise the degree of care, skill, learning and treatment that would be expected under similar circumstances by reasonably prudent oral surgeons within the State of Arizona and Maricopa County.
- Plaintiff suffered injuries and damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ aforementioned breach of their duty owed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff sustained, and will continue to sustain, pain and suffering, permanent injuries, disfigurement and dental expenses as a result of this negligence.
The Response to the Lawsuit Filed By Christensen
Christensen and his practice responded to the lawsuit by filing an answer to the Complaint. The answer states “Defendants admit that Dr. Christensen fell below the standard of care.” The answer further states that “Defendants admit the wrong tooth was pulled and Dr. Christensen fell below the standard of care.”
“Defendants admit the wrong tooth was pulled and Dr. Christensen fell below the standard of care.”
Dental Malpractice Claims in Arizona
Dental malpractice cases are prevalent throughout Arizona and the greater phoenix area. Our offices receive 2-3 calls a month from individuals who have complaints regarding the dental treatment they received and wanting to bring legal action. This is despite the fact that our firm does not even advertise for dental malpractice cases.
Unfortunately, most dental malpractice cases have limited damages. Although the dental provider may have done something wrong, the amount of damages is not enough to justify having an attorney involved. This is especially true because the cases usually require expert testimony and the need to pay an expert to qualify the case to be advanced in Court. As a result, many cases, where dental malpractice may have occurred, are never filed or prosecuted.
Call An Experienced Scottsdale Personal Injury Attorney to Discuss Your Case
If you or a loved one was the victim of someone else’s negligence, contact Scottsdale Injury Lawyers today. A consultation is free and we only earn a fee if we recover for you. In most cases, we advance all costs and if we do not win the case, you owe us nothing. Calling to discuss your case has zero risk. A qualified attorney is available now.
About the author: The content on this page was provided by Scottsdale personal injury attorney and civil rights lawyer Tony Piccuta. Piccuta graduated with honors from Indiana University-Maurer School of Law in Bloomington, Indiana (Previously Ranked Top 35 US News & World Report). Piccuta took and passed the State bars of Arizona, California, Illinois and Nevada (all on the first try). He actively practices throughout Arizona and California. He is a trial attorney that regularly handles serious personal injury cases and civil rights lawsuits. He has obtained six and seven figure verdicts in both state and federal court. In 2022, he set a record $11.75 million dollar settlement for a case he handled against Maricopa County. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers for six years straight. He is a member of the Arizona Association of Justice, Maricopa County Bar Association, Scottsdale Bar Association, American Association for Justice, National Police Accountability Project and Consumer Attorneys of California, among other organizations.
Disclaimer: The information on this web site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information on this page is attorney advertising. Reading and relying upon the content on this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact our law firm for a free consultation and to discuss your specific case and issues.
