Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #287906; Unpublished
Judges Stephens, Sawyer, and M. J. Kelly; unanimous: per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
The Michigan Supreme Court DENIED application for leave to appeal on 10/5/11; Link to Order
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Not Applicable
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Nonparty at Fault
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court determination to strike defendant’s notice of nonparty at fault alleging that subsequent medical malpractice by treating physicians contributed to the injuries sustained by the plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident.
Richard Jackson was injured in a motor vehicle accident and this action was brought on his behalf alleging the negligence of the party who caused the accident. Jackson survived the accident but suffered numerous injuries including injuries to several discs in his back. He was transported to Detroit Medical Center where he underwent surgery during which complications occurred resulting in cardiac arrest and his death.
Following the commencement of the action against the party who caused the accident, these defendants alleged that the negligence of certain unknown surgeons and other medical staff at the hospital during the cervical disectomy surgery caused or contributed to Jackson’s death. Plaintiffs filed a motion to strike this defense alleging that the notice failed to comply with MCR 2.112(K)(3)(b) because it did not contain a statement that explained the basis for believing that the nonparty was at fault. Plaintiffs further argued that under Michigan law, a tortfeasor is liable for all foreseeable injuries arising from his conduct, including damages that result from subsequent medical treatment, and therefore the medical providers should be considered to be “successive tortfeasors” as opposed to “joint tortfeasors,” and therefore could not share in the liability for Mr. Jackson’s injuries.
The trial court determined to strike the notice of nonparty at fault and held that there could be no allocation of fault to Mr. Jackson’s medical providers.
In affirming the trial court ruling, the Court of Appeals stated that:
“We conclude that the comparative fault statutes do not allow for a finding of liability on behalf of the medical providers. We base our conclusion on this Court’s recent opinion in Slager v Kid’s Kourt, LLC, ___ Mich App ___ … (2010), in which this Court disallowed a defendant’s notice of nonparty at fault that named the minor plaintiff’s parents. The court reasoned that the injury occasioned by Kid’s Kourt’s negligence was separate from that caused by the parent’s failure to follow certain medical advice for the injury.”
Applying the Slager analysis to the present case, the Court stated that the injury to Mr. Jackson occurred when he was in an automobile collision. The surgery that preceded his death occurred months later, just as the parents’ failure in Slager to obtain physical therapy services was separated in time from the initial laceration. Consequently, the trial court did not err in striking defendant’s notice of nonparty at fault.
The Court of Appeals further concluded that the notice itself did not comply with the applicable court rule because it “did not set forth the party’s name and last known address nor did it set forth a sufficient brief statement of the basis for believing the nonparty was at fault.” In this case, the Court stated that the party filing such a notice must identify “specific acts or omissions that it reasonably believes might have caused the harm at issue. To interpret the rule otherwise would be to invite parties to give notices that are based on nothing more than pure speculation.”
