Schoenhardt v. Sidhom
| Decision Date | 02 February 2023 |
| Docket Number | Index No. 2414/12 |
| Citation | 2023 NY Slip Op 30899 (U) |
| Parties | CHRISTINE SCHOENHARDT, Plaintiff v. WAGUIH A. SIDHOM, D.D.S., P.C., WAGUIH SIDHOM, D.D.S., RALPH THOMAS COSTAGLIOLA, D.D.S., P.C., Individually AND DOING BUSINESS AS TODT HILL ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, RALPH THOMAS COSTAGLIOLA, D.D.S., Individually and d/b/a TODT HILL ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, GELFMAN AND BIRNBAUM, ORAL SURGERY, P.C., Individually and d/b/a ORAL and MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY OF OCEAN PARKWAY and/or as ORAL SURGERY AND IMPLANT CENTER OF OCEAN PARKWAY, NORMAN E. JOHNSON, D.D.S., Individually and d/b/a ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERYOF OCEANPARKWAY AND/OR AS ORAL SURGERY AND IMPLANT CENTER OF OCEAN PARKWAY, Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
The following e-filed papers read herein: NYSCEF Doc. Nos.:
Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause/ Petition/Cross Motion and Affidavits (Affirmations) Annexed .......8-46. 47-75, 77-101 132-141
Opposing Affidavits (Affirmations)..............................................................................................................108-115,116-123 124-131, 142
Affidavits/Affirmations in Reply.....................................................................................................................143 145-146, 147
Other Papers: ...............................................................................................................................................___ Upon the foregoing papers in this dental malpractice, action, defendants Gelfman and Birnbaum Oral Surgery, P.C. Individually and d/b/a Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery of Ocean Parkway and/or Oral Surgery and Implant Center of Ocean Parkway and Norman E. Johnson, D.D.S, move (in motion [mot.] sequence [seq.] number [no.] 7), pursuant to CPLR 3212, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint of plaintiff Christine Schoenhardt (plaintiff) as against them. Defendants Ralph Thomas Costagliola, D.D.S., P.C. s/h/a Ralph Thomas Costagliola D.D.S., P.O. Individually and d/b/a Todt Hill Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Ralph Thomas Costagliola, D.D.S., s/h/a Ralph Thomas Costagliola D.D.S., Individually and d/b/a Todt Hill Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, (collectively, Dr. Costagliola) move (in mot. seq. no. 8) for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint in its entirety. Defendants Waguih A. Sidhom, Dentist, P.C. s/h/a Waguih A. Sidhom, D.D.S., P.C, and Waguih Sidhom, D.D.S. (collectively Dr. Sidhom), move (in mot, seq, no, 9), pursuant to CPLR 214-a, 3211 and 3212, dismissing all claims sounding in dental negligence, dental malpractice and lack of informed consent as to dental treatment provided prior to February 22, 2010, as being barred by the Statute of Limitations; and pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 3212, granting summary judgment on the issue of liability in favor of these defendants and dismissing plaintiffs' complaint in its entirety. Plaintiff cross-moves (in mot, seq. no. 10) for an order denying all of the defendants' motions.
Plaintiff first presented to Dr. Sidhom for dental treatment on June 17, 1996, and treated him during multiple separate visits for dental cleanings and restorative dental treatment from June 17, 1996, through the initial date of alleged malpractice, July 7, 2008, and the last date of alleged malpractice, March 20, 2012, until her last presentation on August 2, 2012, Dr. Sidhom performed root canal therapy to tooth #15 on July 19, 1996, and the treatment was completed on August 2, 1996, A post and core were placed in tooth #15 on October 7, 1996, and a permanent crown was cemented on the tooth on October 28, 1996.
On December 12, 1997, plaintiff presented to Dr. Sidhom with a broken tooth #30 and was advised of the possibility of crownwork and/or root canal on this tooth. On December 9, 1998, Dr. Sidhom advised plaintiff of the possible need to replace a preexisting crown on tooth #14 due to food compaction. On May 22, 1999, pr, Sidhom initiated root canal therapy on tooth #30 which was completed on May 26, 1999, a permanent crown was cemented on July 6, 1999, and re-cemented on December 13, 1999. On: March 14, 2000, the crown on tooth #30 was sent for lab modification and the modified crown was re-cemented on March 28, 2000. On this date, Dr. Sidhom also determined that tooth #14 was hopeless due to decay under the existing crown and recommended its extraction.
On September 14, 2001, Dr. Sidhom observed deep decay in tooth #13 and recommended root canal therapy, which was performed on September 21, 2001. On November 26, 2001, tooth #14 was extracted and a post and core was also placed in tooth #13. On January 24, 2002, Dr. Sidhom placed a new post in tooth #13 and prepared teeth #13 through #15 for a three-unit bridge. The bridge was placed and cemented in plaintiffs mouth on February 7, 2002. On October 13, 2005, Dr. Sidhom again recomented the: previously placed crown on tooth #30. On October 25, 2008, the preexisting bridge spanning teeth #.13 to #15 was removed due to decay that had formed under the bridge. A new bridge was cemented by Dr. Sidhom on December 9, 2008.
On January 4, 2010, plaintiff presented to Dr. Sidhom with complaints of discomfort around her bridge spanning teeth #13 through #15. He took two periapical[1] X-rays and observed tooth #13 to be infected but did not observe any periapical pathology in tooth #1.5. Dr. Sidhom testified that he reviewed his findings with plaintiff and advised her that she could see an endodontist to have the bridge and post removed in anticipation of root canal re-treatment, or visit an oral surgeon to cut out the infection through an apicoectomy[2] so she could keep her existing post and bridge (. Dr. Sidhom gave plaintiff a prescription for 875 mg of Amoxicillin to treat the infection and provided her with a referral slip to oral surgeon, Ralph Costagliola, D.D.S., for a possible apicoectomy at tooth #13.
Plaintiff presented to Dr, Costagliola on March 3, 2010, with complaints of a painful tooth #13. He took a panoramic film and discussed performing an apicoectomy but informed her that there was only a 50/50 chance of saving the tooth. These teeth were also prepared for crowns. Plaintiff elected to have the apicoectomy performed by Dr. Costagliola and signed a written consent for the procedure, which contained the alternatives and risks to treatment. The apicoectomy of tooth #1.3 was performed on March 16, 2010, Plaintiff had a follow up with Dr. Costagliola on March 29, 2010, and he observed that tooth #13 was healing well. On August 24, 2010, Dr. Sidhom took a periapical film which revealed a pathology around the root of tooth #15, On August 30, 2010, Dr. Sidhom cut the pontic at tooth #14 and recommended an apicoectomy on tooth #15 and prescribed Amoxicillin and Motrin.
On September 23, 2010, plaintiff presented to Dr. Costagliola to discuss placement of an implant at tooth #14. He took a panoramic film and discussed placement of an implant at the site: of tooth #14 to replace the pontic for the bridge spanning teeth #13 through #15. Dr. Costagliola determined that plaintiff would need a bone graft, a sinus lift, and a two-month healing period before implant placement.
Plaintiff testified that she then sought a second opinion from Dr. Johnson on March 26, 2011, to find out if a bone graft and sinus lift were necessary. Dr. Johnson examined plaintiff and took periapical x-rays. He informed her that there were infections in teeth # 13 and #15 and that he would not put an implant at tooth #14 with the surrounding teeth infected. He further advised her that a bone graft and sinus lift were not needed as tooth #14 had enough bone. Dr. Johnson recommended apicoectomies to address the infections in teeth #'s 13 and 15. He testified that he informed plaintiff of all of her options including re-treatment of the root canal, apicoectomy or extraction, bone graft and implant, extraction or doing nothing (NYSCEF Doc No. 24, Dr. Johnson tr at 67, lines 5-16).
Plaintiff decided to proceed with apicoectomies on teeth #'s 13 and 15 which were performed by Dr. Johnson on April 15, 2011 under IV sedation. After plaintiff left Dr. Johnson's office that day, she began experiencing significant nasal bleeding. She called Dr. Johnson's office and was advised to either return to the office or go to Staten Island University Hospital (SIUH). Plaintiff presented to the emergency department at SIUH with complaints of oral bleeding around teeth#'s 13 and 15, gum soreness, blood pooling in the back of her throat and nasal bleeding. At SIUH, packing was placed to stop the bleeding and plaintiff was prescribed phenylephrine, labetalol, and oxycodone. She was examined by Dr. Rock, an oral and maxillofacial surgeon, who determined that the injury likely occurred during the apicoectomies, and that an artery had been cut. He was able to stop the bleeding through suturing the area and applying bone wax. Plaintiff was discharged that same day and returned for a follow up the next day where she was reexamined and was prescribed Augmentin. She returned to SIUH for another follow-up visit on April 20, 2011, where new nasal dressing was applied. Plaintiff returned to SIUH on April 26, 2011, with complaints of continued sensitivity and swelling. Her sutures were removed and teeth #13 and # 15were observed to exhibit Class I-II mobility. Plaintiff was prescribed Augmentin 875 mg and instructed to follow up with Dr. Johnson.
Plaintiff returned to see Dr. Johnson on April 26, 2011, and he noted that the healing was within normal limits and that there was mild mobility of tooth #13....
To continue reading
Request your trial