Mullins v. St. Joseph Mercy Hospital

741 N.W.2d 300, 480 Mich. 948
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 28, 2007
Docket131879
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 741 N.W.2d 300 (Mullins v. St. Joseph Mercy Hospital) 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.

Bluebook
Mullins v. St. Joseph Mercy Hospital, 741 N.W.2d 300, 480 Mich. 948 (Mich. 2007).

Opinion

741 N.W.2d 300 (2007)

Mary MULLINS, Personal Representative of the Estate of Nina F. Mullins, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ST. JOSEPH MERCY HOSPITAL, d/b/a St. Joseph Mercy Health System, Jason White, M.D., Rafael J. Grossman, M.D., and Kimberly Stewart, M.D., Defendants-Appellees and
James R. Bengston, and Walter Whitehouse, M.D., Defendants.

Docket No. 131879. COA No. 263210.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

November 28, 2007.

On order of the Court, leave to appeal having been granted, 477 Mich. 1066, 728 N.W.2d 871 (2007), and the briefs and oral argument of the parties having been considered by the Court, we hereby 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, 677 N.W.2d 813 (2004), does not apply to any causes of action filed after Omelenchuk v. City of Warren, 461 Mich. 567, 609 N.W.2d 177 (2000), was decided in which the savings 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 savings period expired between the date that Omelenchuk was decided *301 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

DeFRAIN v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
817 N.W.2d 504 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2012)
DeFrain v. State Farm Mutual Insurance
809 N.W.2d 601 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2011)
McLean v. McElhaney
798 N.W.2d 29 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2010)
Hoffman v. Barrett
794 N.W.2d 67 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2010)
King v. McPherson Hospital
288 Mich. App. 801 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2010)
Farley v. Carp
782 N.W.2d 508 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2010)
Kidder v. Ptacin
771 N.W.2d 806 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2009)
Ford v. SECURECARE, INC.
769 N.W.2d 228 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Verbrugghe v. Select Specialty Hospital-Macomb County, Inc.
760 N.W.2d 583 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2008)
Estate of Dale v. Robinson
760 N.W.2d 557 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2008)
Luyster v. Sak
748 N.W.2d 815 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Braverman v. Garden City Hospital
746 N.W.2d 612 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Hobdy v. HARPER UNIVERSITY HOSP.
745 N.W.2d 787 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Wyatt v. OAKWOOD HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTERS
744 N.W.2d 148 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Judd v. TOWFIQ
744 N.W.2d 153 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Hartman v. Port Huron Hospital
743 N.W.2d 212 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Clemens v. KOZIARSKI, MD
743 N.W.2d 215 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Kimpson v. Botsford General Hospital
743 N.W.2d 212 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Vanslembrouck v. Halperin
747 N.W.2d 311 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
741 N.W.2d 300, 480 Mich. 948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mullins-v-st-joseph-mercy-hospital-mich-2007.