Mary Lee Obtains Defense Judgment in Dental Malpractice Case

The plaintiff alleged ongoing nerve injury following a dental extraction, filed suit for his injuries, and later brought our client into the lawsuit by way of a Doe Amendment. Mary Lee successfully argued that the plaintiff’s original complaint was time-barred by the statute of limitations as evidenced by the plaintiff’s own deposition testimony and medical records. Mary Lee also successfully argued that despite the plaintiff’s counter-arguments of genuine mistaken belief, the Doe Amendment was nevertheless inapplicable as the plaintiff had sufficient information to timely determine the treating provider’s identity with reasonable diligence. The Court dismissed the entire case with prejudice in favor of our client.