3. The Lilburn Dental Group is a Georgia limited liability company may be served through its registered agent, Dr. Richard Gangwisch at 912 Killian Hill Rd SW, Suite 100, Lilburn, GA 30047. 4. Dr. Gangwisch held himself out to the public, and to in particular, as a competent and skillful dental surgeon, capable of properly and skillfully treating and caring for 5. On August 3, 2011, Dr. Gangwisch was employed by in his capacity as a general dentist, for the purpose of performing a wisdom tooth extraction and to render competent, skillful, knowledgeable and attentive preoperative and postoperative care. 6. On August 3, 2011, Dr. Gangwisch extracted wisdom teeth and prescribed postoperative medicine. 7. During recovery she complained to Dr. Gangwisch about a lack of sensation in her tongue. 8. On Augusr 12, 2011, Gangwisch instructed called Dr. Gangwisch after she severely bit her tongue. Dr. to immediately come to his office.
9. Dr. Gangwisch did not immediately refer to a physician who could diagnose and treat her condition. 10. Dr. Gangwisch did eventually refer to Dr. who is an oral and maxillofacial surgeon. 11. Dr. found the Rachael had a complete transection of her left lingual nerve. 12. Lingual nerve damage is a known risk of wisdom tooth extraction surgery. 13. Because lingual nerve damage is a known risk during a wisdom tooth extraction, great care must be taken by the dentist to identify and protect the lingual nerve from damage. 14. Dr. Gangwisch knew that lingual nerve damage was a known risk but did not inform of that risk. 15. The lingual nerve allows the tongue to have sensation and taste. 16. Dr. performed surgery in an attempt to repair the nerve, but the surgery was unsuccessful.
17. has no sense of taste or other sensation on the left side of her tongue. 18. It is unlikely that will ever recover any sensation in the left part of her tongue. 19. has permanent impairment to the left side of her tongue and she has no sense of taste or feeling on that side of her tongue. She also occasionally has shooting pains. She has a constant consciousness of her condition and is self-conscious over the hypersalivation that accompanies her injury. bleed and exposing her to infection. constantly bites her tongue, causing it to has constant anxiety and social fear. COUNT I NEGLIGENCE 20. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to identify and protect the lingual nerve during the surgery. 21. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to employ the surgical technique that would best protect the lingual nerve. 22. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to employ a surgical technique that would allow him to identify the location of the lingual nerve.
23. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to employ the surgical technique that would best protect the lingual nerve. 24. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to employ the surgical technique that would allow him to visualize the lingual nerve. 25. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty to identify whether there were any anatomical, dental, or other factors which increased the potential for nerve injury. 26. Dr. Gangwisch had a duty not to transect lingual nerve. Dr. Gangwisch did, in fact, transect or cut the lingual nerve during the surgery. 27. 28. As a proximate result of Dr. Gangwisch s negligence, was severely injured and now suffers permanent impairment. 29. As a further proximate result of Dr. Gangwisch s negligence, and her parents have incurred and will continue to incur medical and related expenses in an amount to be proven at trial.
30. Dr. Gangwisch failed to exercise the appropriate degree of care and as a proximate result suffered injuries that would not otherwise have occurred. See affifidavit of Dr.. 31. Since this type of injury does not normally occur without negligence, and since Dr. Gangwisch exclusively performed the operation and there is no indication that has any responsibility for her injury, the fact that was injured permits an inference of negligence. 32. Due to Dr. Gangwisch s negligence, has suffered terrible physical and emotional pain and incurred significant medical and other costs. medical costs and repeated injury to her tongue. will also suffer future will also not be able to pursue her chosen profession because of speech articulation issues caused by the loss of feeling in her tongue. COUNT II BREACH OF CONTRACT 33. The parties agreed that the Defendant s would perform the wisdom tooth extraction in a competent manner. The Defendants failed to do so and therefore breached the contract causing and her family considerable time and expense in an attempt to repair the severed nerve.
Wherefore, the Plaintiff requests that this Court grant the following relief: 1. That a summons issue in terms of the law to the named Defendants; 2. That Plaintiff be awarded compensatory damages in amount to be proven at trial; 3. That the Plaintiff be awarded damages for past and future pain and suffering; 4. That the Plaintiff be awarded damages for future medical costs and lost income; and 5. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as to the Court may appear just and equitable. The Detling Law Group Chuck Detling Attorney for the Plaintiff 3020 Roswell Road Suite 250 Marietta, Georgia 30062 Telephone (404) 663-5218 Facsimile (678) 890-9499 Email chuck@detlinglaw.com