Edward Gerrety sought dental treatment from Dr. Luke Bogdanowicz in October 2019 to replace a dental bridge. Between November 2019 and January 2020, Gerrety saw Dr. Bogdanowicz five times for dental work. Dr. Bogdanowicz determined that Gerrety’s tooth number 31 was fractured and could not be salvaged. In February 2020, Dr. Bogdanowicz removed Gerrety’s tooth and documented that the procedure had no complications.
On August 3 and 13, Gerrety saw Dr. Bogdanowicz to address a fracture in a different tooth. On August 31, Dr. Bogdanowicz found that Gerrety had a root tip “working its way out” at the site from which tooth number 31 was extracted in February. Dr. Bogdanowicz removed the root tip and prescribed Gerrety an antibiotic.
On November 3, Gerrety saw an oral surgeon who suspected that Gerrety had osteomyelitis and made an emergency referral to North Memorial Hospital. Gerrety did not follow through with the emergency referral. On November 14, Gerrety visited an emergency room with facial swelling. Gerrety received IV antibiotics and underwent surgery, which included an incision and drainage of a neck abscess and the extraction of six teeth. He received injectable insulin during his stay and was discharged on November 19 with long-acting insulin.
Gerrety retained Dr. Avrum Goldstein—a former dentist who taught as a professor of dentistry—as an expert witness. Dr. Goldstein’s multiple affidavits stated alleged breaches of the standard of care by Dr. Bogdanowicz. Dr. Goldstein opined that “[a]s a result of these breaches . . . [,] Gerrety suffered significant disfigurement and disability, with associated pain and suffering as indicated in [the] initial report.”
Dr. Bogdanowicz moved to dismiss Gerrety’s complaint under Minnesota Statutes section 145.682 (2024), arguing that Gerrety failed to establish a prima facie case of medical malpractice. Alternatively, Dr. Bogdanowicz moved for summary judgment, arguing that Dr. Goldstein’s testimony was inadmissible. The district court granted Dr. Bogdanowicz’s motions and dismissed the case. The court determined that Gerrety failed to “outline the chain of causation between [Dr.] Bogdanowicz’s alleged breaches of the standard of care and Gerrety’s injuries.” The district court also concluded that Dr. Goldstein’s expert testimony was inadmissible under rule 702 because he was not qualified to offer an opinion on the causation of Gerrety’s injuries and because the testimony lacked foundational reliability. Gerrety appealed.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals stated in its May 11, 2026 Nonprecedential Opinion: “The district court concluded that Dr. Goldstein failed to outline a chain of causation between Dr. Bogdanowicz’s alleged breaches of the standard of care and Gerrety’s osteomyelitis. The court determined that Dr. Goldstein’s explanation of the disease progression failed to address the antibiotics prescribed to Gerrety between the extraction of tooth number 31 and the osteomyelitis diagnosis, the nearly-six-month period during which Gerrety did not experience any symptoms, and the potential impact of Gerrety’s uncontrolled diabetes and repeated failure to follow after-care instructions and referrals.”
The Minnesota appellate court responded: “The statute, however, does not require an expert’s affidavit to definitively disprove all possible alternative causes. Minn. Stat. § 145.682. Instead, the affidavit at the prima facie stage must simply outline the chain of causation … Dr. Goldstein did so in his December 2024 affidavit … Because Dr. Goldstein’s affidavit provided a sufficient outline as to causation, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion by demanding more than is required of an expert affidavit at the prima facie stage.”
Furthermore, “Because the district court ruled that Gerrety’s expert needed more qualifications than required by the rule, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion by excluding Dr. Goldstein’s testimony under rule 702.”
Lastly, “The district court abused its discretion in determining that Dr. Goldstein’s opinion lacked foundational reliability.”
Source Gerrety v. Bogdanowicz, A25-1358.
If you or a loved one suffered a serious injury (or worse) as a result of dental malpractice in Minnesota or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a Minnesota dental malpractice lawyer, or a dental malpractice in your state, who may investigate your dental malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a dental malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click on the “Contact Us Now” tab to the right, visit our website, or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find dental malpractice attorneys in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
