Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #266944; Unpublished
Judges Talbot, Owens, and Murray; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Entitlement to PIP Benefits: Arising Out of / Causation Requirement [3105(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals held the trial court improperly excluded plaintiff’s expert from providing testimony in this action for no-fault first party benefits that would show the exacerbation of plaintiff’s pre-existing back injury arose out of the ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle.
The plaintiff’s pre-existing back injuries were aggravated when he was hit by a runaway vehicle that crashed through a gas station door. Plaintiff intended to prove causation by calling Dr. Joseph Brown who would testify the motor vehicle accident exacerbated plaintiff’s dormant spondylolisthesis. The trial court excluded Dr. Brown’s testimony under MRE 702 on the basis there was no reliable foundation for his opinion but only temporal association and logical fallacy. The Court of Appeals disagreed and affirmed, noting that when expert testimony is based on speculation, it should be excluded. However, if basic methodology and principles create a sound foundation for the ultimate conclusion, the expert testimony is admissible. In this case, Dr. Brown would have testified that plaintiff had been asymptomatic since 1993 but that trauma, heavy lifting or hypertension could cause him to become symptomatic. This testimony would have established a logical sequence of cause and effect between the accident and the aggravation and was improperly excluded. In this regard, the Court of Appeals reasoned:
“Without dispute, plaintiff suffered from a preexisting medical condition. However, the presented evidence indicated plaintiff had been asymptomatic since 1993. Dr. Brown testified that plaintiff’s specific preexisting condition could cause him to experience severe collateral effects from a minor shift in his spine, and events causing asymptomatic spondylolisthesis to become symptomatic typically involved hyperextension, heavy lifting, or an acute trauma. By all accounts, the runaway van caved in the gas station door three or four feet, which struck plaintiff – who was standing just inside the door – in the legs and buttocks and caused him to stumble and fall. Immediately after the incident, plaintiff complained of pain in his back and left leg. Moreover, there was no evidence of any other physically traumatic event within this time frame. Dr. Brown’s opinion that the accident aggravated plaintiff’s preexisting condition was not the type of post hoc ergo propter hoc ‘scientific’ analysis of which courts must be wary. . . . Instead, the proffered testimony would have established a logical sequence of cause and effect between the accident and the aggravation of plaintiff’s spondylolisthesis. The trial court erred in not allowing Dr. Brown to provide his expert opinion on the issue of causation.”
