Dentist's Practical Joke Leads Him to Court
Lawyer Blogs
For the purposes of a practical joke, an oral surgeon exploited the vulnerability of a patient under general anesthesia and had to pay her $250,000 as settlement. Then, he sued the insurance company that refused to defend his egregious behavior. As a result of the high court's ruling Thursday, he now gets back the $250,000, plus another $750,000 for damages and attorney fees. The jokester wins.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Robert Woo, who had sued Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. The company refused to defend Woo under his policy because it said the not-very-funny practical joke Woo played on his patient did not qualify as "dental services."
Woo's surgical assistant had asked him to replace two of her teeth with implants. Woo, who often teased the assistant about her pot-bellied pig, had the implants made — as well as two extras in the shape of boar tusks. While the assistant was sedated, Woo removed her oxygen mask, put the tusks in her mouth and took pictures, some with her eyes pried open.
The employee was so unnerved when she saw the photos, she did not return to work and sued.
The most stunning aspect of the decision was the majority's opinion: "We conclude that Fireman's had a duty to defend under Woo's professional liability provision because the insertion of boar tusk flippers in [the patient's] mouth conceivably fell within the policy's broad definition of the practice of dentistry."
The general practice of dentistry includes humiliating vulnerable patients?
Thank Justices Mary Fairhurst, Richard Sanders, Bobbe Bridge, Tom Chambers and Susan Owens for that wisdom. They overturned a state Appeals Court ruling that sided with Fireman's.
Related listings
-
Embattled Gonzales talks crime-fighting in Indy
Lawyer Blogs 07/27/2007[##_1L|1203445004.jpg|width="140" height="112" alt=""|_##]Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is in Indianapolis Friday addressing law enforcement assigned to sex crimes. Gonzales' appearance comes one day after Senate Democrats called for a ...
-
Minister tells court marijuana is a sacrament
Lawyer Blogs 07/26/2007[##_1L|1108823798.jpg|width="120" height="88" alt=""|_##]The mail-order minister of a Hollywood church that burns marijuana during services and allegedly sells it to members says that’s protected under federal law because the drug is a religious sacr...
-
CA Man Charged With Obscenity Violations
Lawyer Blogs 07/25/2007A California man has been charged by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles with operating an Internet-based obscenity distribution business and related offenses, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division a...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.