Driver v. Naini
490 Mich. 239
| Mich. | 2011Background
- Driver sued Dr. Naini and MCA for alleged failure to screen for colon cancer after a 2003 CEA test result.
- In 2007, nonparty at fault (CCA) was identified; plaintiff moved to add CCA under MCL 600.2957(2) and filed an amended complaint 49 days later.
- Plaintiff did not comply with the 91-day notice waiting period before adding CCA under the nonparty fault statute.
- CCA moved for summary disposition arguing time-bar; circuit court denied; Court of Appeals reversed in part.
- This Court held that plaintiff could not amend the NOI to toll for CCA; Bush does not apply; Burton controls the notice-waiting-period tolling; and MCL 600.2301 does not salvage the claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NOI amendment tolls against nonparties | Driver maintains Bush permits amendment to preserve tolling for nonparties. | CCA argues no tolling from amended NOI and that timing bars action. | Bush inapplicable; no tolling for CCA; time-barred. |
| Whether six-month discovery rule governs CCA claim timing | Discovery rule could extend time for CCA under NNPF/2-year clock. | Discovery rule does not rescue due to accrued date and NOI timing. | Discovery rule does not save CCA claim; six-month window expired. |
| Whether MCL 600.2301 allows cure to add nonparty after premature filing | 2301 permits correction to further justice; cure applies. | No pending proceeding against CCA; amendment inappropriate; rights prejudiced. | 600.2301 inapplicable; no cure; error disregarded. |
| Relation between MCL 600.2912b(3) and MCL 600.2957(2) reconciled | NNPF 91-day window and discovery rule can apply to timely bring nonparty claims. | Statutes conflict; no implied tolling; filing timeline governs. | Statutes cannot save; CCA claim time-barred; Burton controls. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bush v Shabahang, 484 Mich 156 (Mich. 2009) (NOI tolling depends on compliance with notice requirements)
- Burton v Reed City Hosp Corp, 471 Mich 745 (Mich. 2005) (premature complaint tolling requires strict adherence to notice-waiting periods)
- Moll v Abbott Laboratories, 444 Mich 1 (Mich. 1993) (statutes of limitations purposes and rationale for discovery-based tolling)
- Potter v McLeary, 484 Mich 397 (Mich. 2009) (NOI and statute-specific considerations in malpractice actions)
- Roberts v Mecosta Co Gen Hosp, 466 Mich 57 (Mich. 2002) (statutory interpretation: tolling and notice provisions)
- Boodt v Borgess Med Ctr, 481 Mich 558 (Mich. 2008) (precedent on limitations and notice requirements in medical malpractice)
- Danse Corp v Madison Hts, 466 Mich 175 (Mich. 2002) (statutory construction principles for harmonizing statutes)