ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20706, 2 May 1929, Page 9

ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE.

CLAIM AGAINST DENTIST. PATIENT SWALLOWS A TOOTH. (Per United Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May 1. A claim for £l9B, special damages for wages and medical expenses, and £SOO general damages, was made by Miss Isabella Vera Gwilliam against Arthur M. Carter, dentist* in the Supreme Court to-day. , ■ The plaintiff claimed that while the defendant was extracting her teeth in October, 1921, he allowed her to inhale -. a tooth, and - as a result she had suffered great pain, loss, damage, and expense, and "her health had been seriously affected , for three and a-half years, and she had been entirely prevented from following her usual occupation of apprentice to a boot litter. The defence was’ a denial of- negli- 1 gent and unskilful conduct and of all the plaintiff’s other allegations. Counsel for the plaintiff said she was a young girl, and in October, 1924, the ' defendant extracted all her teeth at one sitting, a doctor administering a general anaesthetic. Next morning the plaintiff experienced a choking , sensation and irritation of the chest. Dr Murray was called, and treated her with medicine for some months. Eighteen months later ’ the plaintiff moved to Herne Bay, and there she consulted Dr Hudson on account of severe haemorrhage. In June, 1927, he advised that she should go to hospital for X-ray examination, and this she.did. There was still no idea of a tooth being on a lung, but the htEtuorrhages continued. In January, 1928, she felt a hard substance in ' her throat, and coughed up a tooth. Her mother and sister immediately consulted the defendant, and he expressed his regret and identified the tooth. The plaintiff’s chest trouble appeared to get better, and when a new X-ray plate was taken • there’was no sign of "the dark substance that had appeared in the first plate. Counsel said he had failed to get a den*, tist to give evidence for him, although , he approached 12. Evidence was given by the plaintiff, Dr Murray, Dr, Hudson, Dr Gwynne (radiologist), and Dr Graham Lindsay. ’ ■ The last-named said that if portion of ■ a tooth, such as that exhibited, had been .missed by a dentist his checking over must have been faulty. Part of a tooth might slip away unknown to tlie most careful and experienced officer. Alice Gwilliam, mother of the plaintiff, described a conversation she had with the defendant, in which he said that ; part of a tooth, must have slipped down unnoticed. He added that it was not his fault. Counsel for the defendant submitted that the plaintiff had established no--case of negligence for the defendant to answer. Plaintiff’s own witnesses had stated that such a mishap could, occur entirely without negligence. Me Justice Blair said the strongest point of the plaintiff’s case seemed to be that there was something inhaled, and that part of a tooth had been left behind. He rcserved the non-t tit point, and asked to hear evidence only in ex- ■, planation of how a fragment of a tooth got to the lung. There was overwhelming evidence, even in the plaintiff’s case, to show that the mere fact of a tooth getting into a lung was not any evidence of negligence. Professor Dodds, Dean of the Dental ‘ Faculty of Otego University,- identified the tooth exhibited as the anterior root of a first lower molar. He failed to see any evidence of the root having been touched by an instrument It was not ' fully developed, and oh account of disease had never come above the surface of the gum. There would be nothing to ' indicate to an operator that such a root : ; was there. It was quite possible that even with the greatest care, such a fra"- ■ ment might reach a lung. ° ' Mr Sullivan, counsel for the plaintiff: The success or non-success of this case - is important to the-Dental Association? Witness: It is important to all dei* tists on the register of New Zealand. Witness said he was aware the Dental Association was’ behind the; case, and admitted he had come up from Dunedin /J specially to give evidence. ' The case was adjourned till to-mor- ' row. .