From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mullins v. ST Joseph Mercy

Supreme Court of Michigan
Nov 28, 2007
480 Mich. 948 (Mich. 2007)

Opinion

No. 131879.

November 28, 2007.

Reported below: 271 Mich App 503.


Summary Disposition November 28, 2007:

We reverse the July 11, 2006, judgment of the Court of Appeals. MCR 7.302(G)(1). We conclude that this Court's decision in Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642 (2004), does not apply to any causes of action filed after Omelenchuk v City of Warren, 461 Mich 567 (2000), was decided in which the saving period expired, i.e., two years had elapsed since the personal representative was appointed, sometime between the date that Omelenchuk was decided and within 182 days after Waltz was decided. All other causes of action are controlled by Waltz. In the instant case, because the plaintiff filed this action after Omelenchuk was decided and the saving period expired between the date that Omelenchuk was decided and within 182 days after Waltz was decided, Waltz is not applicable. Accordingly, we remand this case to the Washtenaw Circuit Court for entry of an order denying the defendants' motion for summary disposition and for further proceedings not inconsistent with this order.


Summaries of

Mullins v. ST Joseph Mercy

Supreme Court of Michigan
Nov 28, 2007
480 Mich. 948 (Mich. 2007)
Case details for

Mullins v. ST Joseph Mercy

Case Details

Full title:MARY MULLINS, Personal Representative of the Estate of Nina F. Mullins…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Nov 28, 2007

Citations

480 Mich. 948 (Mich. 2007)

Citing Cases

Hoffman v. Barrett

See Ligons II, 490 Mich. at 74–76, 89–90, 803 N.W.2d 271. Because Waltz is inapplicable in the present case,…

DeFrain v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

DeFrain, 291 Mich.App. at 718, 809 N.W.2d 601.Mullins v. St. Joseph Mercy Hosp., 480 Mich. 948, 741 N.W.2d…