Court Opinion

ID: 9791185
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:07:15.758441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:34.674656
License: Public Domain

Callow, C.J.
(concurring)—Again, I concur in the result which remands the cause for trial on the merits. The action should not have been disposed of on summary judgment. The affidavit of Dr. Moline is ambiguous in that it states:
[T]he pre-anesthetic history obtained by Dr. Atkins was not adequate in that he omitted to determine whether the patient had . . . high blood pressure and the failure to do this was not consistent with the accepted standard of care among the dental profession in western Washington in 1972.
At the very least, a question was raised as to the standard of care in the profession under the circumstances. It is one thing to determine if a patient has a history of high blood pressure, and another thing to test a patient prior to administering an anesthetic to determine if high blood pressure is then present. Dr. Moline's affidavit was confusing as to whether it was the standard of care of the dental profession to inquire only into the history of the patient, or to perform the usual blood pressure tests as well. This question having been raised, it was not proper to dismiss the cause of action on summary judgment, but to resolve it by trial.