Martin v. Rome

PONDER, Judge.

This is a dental malpractice suit. The district court rendered judgment in the patient’s favor and defendant suspensively appealed. We affirm.

Defendant-appellant assigns as errors by the trial court its(1) finding that Dr. Rome’s care did not measure up to the standard of care usually possessed and exercised by dentists in the same community;(2) failing to apply the law of redhibition, thus depriving defendant the opportunity to repair the bridgework manufactured by another and bought by him for resale; and(3) refusing to grant a new trial because defendant discovered during the…