|
Nos. 124994-124995
| Johanna Woodard, etc., |
|
Craig L. Nemier |
Plaintiffs-Appellees and Cross-Appellants, |
|
Nancy V. Dembinski |
| |
|
Mark R. Granzotto |
vs (Washtenaw - Connors, T.) |
|
|
| Joseph R. Custer, M.D., |
|
Kevin P. Hanbury |
Defendant-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, |
|
Richard C. Kraus |
| and |
|
|
Michael K. Lipscomb, M.D., Michelle M. Nypaver, M.D., |
|
|
and Mona M. Riskalla, M.D., |
|
|
Defendants. |
|
|
| ------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
|
| Johanna Woodard, Individually and as Next Friend |
|
|
| of Austin D. Woodard, a Minor, and Steven Woodard, |
|
|
Plaintiffs-Appellees and Cross-Appellants, |
|
|
| v. |
|
|
University of Michigan Medical Center, |
|
|
Defendant-Appellant and Cross-Appellee. |
|
|
| ________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiffs-Appellees and Cross-Appellants' Brief on Appeal>>
Defendants-Appellants and Cross-Appellees' Brief on Appeal>>
American Board of Medical Specialties' Amicus Curiae Brief>>
American Board of Pediatrics' Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Michigan State Medical Society's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Michigan Trial Lawyers Association's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Background
The Woodards' 15-day-old son was admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit at the University of Michigan Hospital, where he was treated for a respiratory problem. He was under the care of Dr. Joseph Custer, the director of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. When the infant was moved to the general hospital ward, physicians in that ward discovered that both of the infant's legs were fractured. The Woodards sued Custer and the hospital, alleging that the fractures were the result of negligent medical procedures. Custer is board certified in pediatrics and has certificates of special qualifications in pediatric critical care medicine and neonatal-perinatal medicine. The Woodards' proposed expert witness, Dr. Anthony Casamassima, is board certified in pediatrics, but does not have any certificates of special qualifications. The trial court determined that Casamassima was not qualified under MCL 600.2169 to testify against Custer and dismissed the Woodards' lawsuit. In an unpublished opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that Casamassima was not qualified to testify under MCL 600.2169. But the Court of Appeals remanded the case for trial, concluding that, due to the nature of their son's injuries, the Woodards did not need an expert to support their claims of negligence. The Supreme Court reversed that part of the Court of Appeals opinion earlier this year, holding that the Woodards could not proceed without expert testimony. The Supreme Court will now consider whether the Woodards' proposed expert is qualified under MCL 600.2169 to testify against Custer.
Top of Page
|
