Pedersen v. Norris

Citations

• 116 Wash. 338
• 199 P. 732
• 1921 Wash. LEXIS 846

Syllabus

<p>Physicians and Surgeons (11)—Actions eor Malpractice-Question por Jury. The negligence of a dentist in the extraction of a tooth, upon removing a gold crown, is a question for the jury, where the plaintiff testified the tooth was sound, though a majority of the witnesses testified the tooth was diseased, and there was testimony that the tooth was loose, and that the bridge could not be removed without extracting the tooth to which it was attached.</p> <p>Same (12)—Instructions. In an action for damages for negligently extracting a tooth where there was conflicting evidence as to its soundness, a requested instruction, that “if said tooth was diseased, then I charge you . .”.....the extraction was a benefit to the plaintiff and not a damage,” was properly refused, since it would not follow as a matter of fact or of law that a tooth which was diseased or not sound should be extracted.</p>