From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Latessa v. Mich. Inst. of Urology, PC

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan
Nov 29, 2017
SC: 156070 (Mich. Nov. 29, 2017)

Opinion

SC: 156070

11-29-2017

NANCY LATESSA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICHIGAN INSTITUTE OF UROLOGY, PC, ST. JOHN PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM, ST. JOHN MACOMB-OAKLAND HOSPITAL, SCOTT SIRCUS, MD, and GEORGE CHRISTENSEN, DO, Defendants-Appellees.


Order

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice Brian K. Zahra Bridget M. McCormack David F. Viviano Richard H. Bernstein Kurtis T. Wilder Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices COA: 331476
Macomb CC: 2014-003645-NH

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 25, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

BERNSTEIN, J., did not participate due to his prior relationship with the Sam Bernstein Law Firm.

CLEMENT, J., did not participate.

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2017

/s/_________

Clerk


Summaries of

Latessa v. Mich. Inst. of Urology, PC

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan
Nov 29, 2017
SC: 156070 (Mich. Nov. 29, 2017)
Case details for

Latessa v. Mich. Inst. of Urology, PC

Case Details

Full title:NANCY LATESSA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICHIGAN INSTITUTE OF UROLOGY, PC…

Court:Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Date published: Nov 29, 2017

Citations

SC: 156070 (Mich. Nov. 29, 2017)