Dively v. William Beaumont Hosp.
This text of 696 N.W.2d 709 (Dively v. William Beaumont Hosp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
DIVELY
v.
WILLIAM BEAUMONT HOSP.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
SC: 127218, COA: 242288.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 22, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration. Pursuant to MCR 7.316(A)(4), we DIRECT the Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision in light of the transcript establishing that Lighthall was in fact not among the witnesses identified during voir dire. We further DIRECT that the Court of Appeals reconsider the admissibility of Lighthall's testimony under MRE 702 in light of our decisions in Gilbert v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 470 Mich. 749, 685 N.W.2d 391 (2004), and Craig v. Oakwood Hospital, 471 Mich. 67, 684 N.W.2d 296 (2004).
We do not retain jurisdiction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
696 N.W.2d 709, 472 Mich. 906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dively-v-william-beaumont-hosp-mich-2005.