What can I do, and how much time do I have, if I chipped one tooth and another was diagnosed as nonviable due to an incident at a restaurant?
Get Legal Help Today
Compare Quotes From Top Companies and Save
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
What can I do, and how much time do I have, if I chipped one tooth and another was diagnosed as nonviable due to an incident at a restaurant?
I ordered a salad that contained walnuts, upon my first bite I bit into a walnut husk identified by waiter of which chipped my brand new crown and left the other tooth in pain. It’s been almost 2 years and the other tooth is now considered non-viable dead and needs a root canal and potentially a new crown. I’ve attempted to speak with multiple people at the restaurant and their claims department, but have never reached anyone who could help. What can I do now and is it too late to pursue anything? I’ve gone for 2 years with a painful front tooth and now it’s dead.
Thank you.
Asked on February 5, 2018 under Personal Injury, California
Answers:
S.L,. Member, California Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney
Answered 6 years ago | Contributor
California has a two year statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit in a personal injury case. If two years have elapsed since the date of your injury, it is too late to sue the restaurant for negligence. If you still have a little time remaining before the second anniversary of the date of your injury, immediately file a lawsuit for negligence against the restaurant. Once the statute of limitations expires, you have lost your rights forever in the matter.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although AttorneyPages.com has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.