Home COMMONWEALTH vs. CHARLES JOHNSON (and seven companion cases [Note 1]).

355 Mass. 800

April 30, 1969

There was no error in the trial and convictions of the defendants on the complaints under G. L. c. 272, Section 28A.

Judgments affirmed.


FOOTNOTES

[Note 1] The defendants in the companion cases were Leo Marangi, Joseph M. Palladino, Sr., John L. Hunt, Robert W. Osmond, Alfred Stanley Hughes, Jr., James H. Hunt, Francis X. Rausch.

Home ROSALIE S. LYONS & another vs. CAMBRIDGE CLINIC, INC. & another.

355 Mass. 800

April 30, 1969

This is an action of tort brought by Rosalie S. Lyons (plaintiff) against a dentist for malpractice and against the clinic where the dentist treated the plaintiff. The husband of the plaintiff seeks consequential damages. The only issue we concern ourselves with is whether the trial judge erred in directing verdicts for the defendants. The dentist after examination of the plaintiff and X-rays extracted a decayed tooth. Two days after the extraction the plaintiff was admitted to a hospital where "a diagnosis was made of `[f]racture of left mandible.'" We discover nothing in the testimony of the expert who testified for the plaintiff that shows the dentist was negligent in her treatment of the plaintiff. See Brune v. Belinkoff, 354 Mass. 102 . The testimony of a radiologist that the "x-ray of the plaintiff's jaw taken by . . . [the dentist] just prior to the extraction . . . revealed the same linear fracture line shown on the x-ray film taken at the . . . [h]ospital several days after the extraction" does not in our view aid the plaintiff. There was no error.

Exceptions overruled.

Home CHESTER RUDNICKI vs. THE HEARST CORPORATION & others.

355 Mass. 800

May 1, 1969

In this action of tort each of the three defendants demurred to the declaration, and each demurrer was sustained. The plaintiff demurred to the answers filed by each defendant and these demurrers were overruled. The plaintiff moved for judgment against all the defendants and this motion was denied. From these orders the plaintiff appealed. The order denying the motion for

Page 801

judgment was not appealable. Wishnewsky v. Saugus, 325 Mass. 191 , 192. There was no error.

Orders sustaining defendants' demurrers affirmed.

Orders overruling plaintiff's demurrers affirmed.

Appeal from order denying plaintiff's motion for judgment dismissed.

Judgments for defendants.