New York, NY (December 1, 2025) – Rawle & Henderson Of Counsel Elisa Karnis secured three summary judgment dismissals in New York Dental Malpractice cases by presenting persuasive and dispositive expert testimony that eliminated any disputed issues of material fact. While dismissals on summary judgment are always rare, hard-earned victories, obtaining three dismissals on summary judgment is an extraordinary accomplishment demonstrating Ms. Karnis’ exceptional legal acumen, abilities and skill in dental malpractice cases.

Case #1: Bronx County

Ms. Karnis’ first summary judgment win occurred in a case where a general dentist was accused of negligently performing and failing to complete a lower molar extraction and failing to obtain informed consent, which purportedly caused various injuries, including a broken jaw, Temporomandibular Joint Disorder (TMJ), Bell’s Palsy and trigeminal neuralgia. Plaintiff’s claims for compensatory and punitive damages were summarily dismissed because Ms. Karnis unequivocably established through expert oral surgery testimony that her client did not violate the applicable standard of care because her client was qualified to perform the procedure and  properly recommended extraction of a tooth that was symptomatic and causing pain, that customary anesthetics were administered, that an appropriate technique was used to extract the tooth and that the complained of injuries were risks that can occur in the absence of negligence.

Case #2:  Suffolk County

Ms. Karnis obtained her second summary judgment in a dental malpractice case where a patient claims that an oral surgeon failed to obtain informed consent to perform teeth extractions that caused her to remain toothless for an extended period of time and that the subsequent full restoration was not completed within a reasonable period of time. Ms. Karnis successfully defended those claims by presenting expert testimony establishing that informed consent to perform the extractions and a full dental restoration was obtained and that any lack of informed consent did not proximately cause injuries to the plaintiff.  The evidence presented also established that defendants did not depart from accepted standards of dental care and their treatment and care did not proximately cause injuries to the plaintiff. The Court also found that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact to defeat defendants’ motion, as plaintiff’s expert’s affirmation was speculative and conclusory. The Court also found that a treatment plan that takes longer than anticipated, discomfort and healing following extraction, or allowing plaintiff’s month to heal for several months was not a departure from the standard of care. Based upon that testimony, the Court found that Ms. Karnis had established that the plaintiff gave informed consent and any lack thereof would not have proximately caused injury to the plaintiff.

Case #3:  Suffolk County

Ms. Karnis’ third summary judgment victory involved a case where a patient unsuccessfully claimed that an oral surgeon failed to properly  administer an anesthetic before performing a wisdom tooth extraction.  Ms. Karnis successfully refuted that claim by introducing testimony from an oral surgeon  proving that there was no deviation or departure from the standard of care that proximately injured the plaintiff. The Court found that Ms. Karnis’s expert and supporting evidence established that her oral surgeon client adhered to the applicable standards of care.

For more information about Elisa Karnis and the Dental Liability Practice Group, visit: https://rawle.com/attorneys/elisa-r-karnis/?preview=true

About Rawle & Henderson LLP:  Founded in 1783, Rawle & Henderson has been recognized by the American Bar Association as the oldest law firm in continuous practice in the United States. With offices in Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, its lawyers represent the interests of corporations, businesses, individuals and their insurers.  For more information, visit http://www.rawle.com