Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Matthew Ryan McCrea v. Joshua Scott Brower
Citation: Not availableDocket: 17-0033
Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa; September 27, 2017; Iowa; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Matthew McCrea appealed a district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Joshua Brower on a dental malpractice claim, which was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds. McCrea argued that he did not have notice of his injury until a period within the statutory timeframe. The court examined whether there was any genuine issue of material fact regarding the timing of McCrea's knowledge of his injury under Iowa Code § 614.1(9)(a). The undisputed facts revealed that McCrea began treatment with Brower in April 2010, experiencing discomfort with a previously problematic tooth. After Brower extracted the tooth and placed a titanium implant, McCrea reported ongoing issues with the implant and gum line at follow-up appointments in January and March 2011. In April 2013, McCrea sought a second opinion from a periodontist, who determined that the area was infected and criticized Brower's procedures. The district court ruled that McCrea should have been aware of his injury by January 2011, thus starting the statute of limitations at that time. McCrea's subsequent filing in October 2014 was deemed outside the two-year limit. The court affirmed the summary judgment, rejecting McCrea's claim that the limitations period did not start until April 2013 upon receiving the periodontist's diagnosis. The appellate court upheld the district court's decision, affirming the ruling without further opinion.