Bousset v. Walker

Francois and Eric Bousset sued Mrs. Bousset’s dentist, Corinne Walker, and her professional corporation “Dr. Walker” for failing to diagnose an infected tooth during a period of continuous treatment. Dr. Walker moved for summary judgment based on the expiration of the statute of limitation and the Georgia Supreme Court’s rejection of the continuous treatment doctrine in Young v. Williams , 274 Ga. 845 560 SE2d 690 2002 Young II , that this court had adopted for the first time in Williams v. Young , 247 Ga. App. 337 543 SE2d 737 2000 Young I . The trial court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the Boussets argue: 1 that Young II , supra, should not be applied retroactively; and 2 even if Young II does apply retroactively, the exception in Whitaker v. Zirkle , 188 Ga. App. 706 374 SE2d 106 1988, for a subsequent injury applies to provide a later starting date for the statute of limitation. We disagree and affirm.

“Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56 c. A de novo standard of review applies to an appeal from a grant of summary judgment, and we view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions and inferences drawn from it, in the light most favorable to the nonmovant.” Citation omitted. Murray v. Fitzgerald Convenient Centers , 239 Ga. App. 799 521 SE2d 915 1999.