Estate of Annie Ruth Flie v. Oakwood Healthcare Inc
333389
| Mich. Ct. App. | Dec 12, 2017Background
- Decedent Annie Ruth Flie underwent total knee arthroplasty performed by Dr. Joseph Finch on May 6, 2010 and died May 9, 2010 after developing urosepsis and bowel infarction.
- Plaintiff (Jermaine Harris, personal representative) alleged defendants failed to order/obtain/review required preoperative studies, which would have revealed a urinary infection and prevented fatal sepsis.
- Plaintiff sued Dr. Finch (medical malpractice) and Finch, P.C. (ordinary negligence and vicarious liability), later dismissing malpractice claims against Finch and Finch, P.C.; Finch, P.C. moved under MCR 2.116(C)(8) to dismiss the ordinary negligence claim as actually sounding in medical malpractice.
- Trial court granted Finch, P.C.’s (C)(8) motion; plaintiff appealed, arguing the claim against Finch, P.C. sounded in ordinary negligence because the employee who failed to obtain clearance was an unlicensed medical assistant.
- The court framed the controlling question as whether the claim against the professional corporation sounded in medical malpractice (subject to malpractice procedures) or ordinary negligence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether claim against Finch, P.C. sounds in ordinary negligence or medical malpractice | The negligence arose from acts of an unlicensed medical assistant, so the claim must be ordinary negligence, not malpractice | Finch, P.C. provided professional services through its licensed physician; failures in preoperative clearance are professional and therefore sound in medical malpractice | Court held the claim sounds in medical malpractice because the PC rendered professional services via the licensed physician and the medical assistant acted on behalf of the PC |
Key Cases Cited
- Maiden v. Rozwood, 461 Mich. 109 (Sup. Ct.) (standards for MCR 2.116(C)(8) motion)
- Dorris v. Detroit Osteopathic Hosp. Corp., 460 Mich. 26 (Sup. Ct.) (cannot evade malpractice requirements by labeling claim as ordinary negligence)
- Bryant v. Oakpointe Villa Nursing Ctr., 471 Mich. 411 (Sup. Ct.) (two-part test whether claim sounds in medical malpractice)
- Kuznar v. Raksha Corp., 481 Mich. 169 (Sup. Ct.) (professional-relationship inquiry under malpractice test)
- Potter v. McLeary, 484 Mich. 397 (Sup. Ct.) (professional corporations can be defendants in malpractice actions; services are malpractice when they are "professional services")
- Simmons v. Apex Drug Stores, Inc., 201 Mich. App. 250 (Ct. App.) (look beyond pleading labels to the gravamen of the complaint)