From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Estate of Greathouse v. Rhodes

Supreme Court of Michigan
Oct 10, 2001
465 Mich. 885 (Mich. 2001)

Opinion

No. 117898 (55).

October 10, 2001.


COA: 214434

Berrien CC: 96-003566-NH On order of the Court, the delayed application for leave to appeal and the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant from the August 18, 2000 decision of the Court of Appeals are considered, and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(F)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals insofar as it held that plaintiff forfeited her challenge to defendant's expert witness by not filing the motion until a month before trial. There is no statutory or case law basis for ruling that a medical malpractice expert must be challenged within a "reasonable time." Further, we REMAND the case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of whether MCL 600.2169(1) applies under the facts of this case. If it is found to apply to this case, then the Court of Appeals is to consider the effect of McDougall v Schanz, 461 Mich. 15 (1999), on the instant case which was tried and on appeal in the Court of Appeals at the time McDougall was released by this Court. Reported below: 242 Mich. App. 221.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

Cavanagh, J., would deny leave to appeal.

Kelly, J., would grant leave to appeal.


Summaries of

Estate of Greathouse v. Rhodes

Supreme Court of Michigan
Oct 10, 2001
465 Mich. 885 (Mich. 2001)
Case details for

Estate of Greathouse v. Rhodes

Case Details

Full title:ESTATE OF ROBERT GREATHOUSE, Deceased, by Sally Greathouse, as Personal…

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Oct 10, 2001

Citations

465 Mich. 885 (Mich. 2001)
636 N.W.2d 138

Citing Cases

Walworth v. Metro. Hosp.

Defendants' motion to strike Dr. Kitain was timely brought two months before trial. See Greathouse v Rhodes,…

Stevens v. Lansing Anesthesiologists, P.C.

To be clear, there is no rule that an opposing party must challenge a medical malpractice expert before trial…