Lisa Tyra v. Organ Procurement Agency of Michigan
498 Mich. 68
| Mich. | 2015Background
- Two consolidated appeals (Tyra and Furr) involve plaintiffs who filed medical-malpractice complaints before the statutory notice-of-intent (NOI) waiting period (typically 182 days) had expired; defendants moved for summary disposition after the statute of limitations ran.
- Trial courts granted summary disposition in Tyra and denied it in Furr; the Court of Appeals split, relying on Zwiers to permit amendment/cure under MCL 600.2301 in some circumstances.
- Central statutory framework: MCL 600.2912b(l) (NOI/waiting period), MCL 600.5856 (tolling rules), and MCL 600.2301 (courts may amend pleadings/disregard defects when substantial rights not affected).
- Controlling precedents: Burton held that a complaint filed before expiration of the NOI waiting period does not commence an action and does not toll the statute of limitations; Bush allowed curing a defective but timely NOI under MCL 600.2301; Zwiers (Mich. Ct. App.) applied Bush and MCL 600.2301 to rescue prematurely filed complaints in limited circumstances.
- The Supreme Court held that Driver effectively overruled Zwiers by clarifying that MCL 600.2301 applies to curing defective NOIs (content defects) but not to complaints filed prematurely such that no action was commenced; accordingly, prematurely filed complaints do not toll the limitations period and cannot be saved by MCL 600.2301.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Zwiers remains good law after Driver | Zwiers can save prematurely filed complaints via MCL 600.2301 when defendants are not prejudiced | Driver limited MCL 600.2301 to curing defective NOIs and preserved Burton’s rule that premature complaints do not commence actions | Driver overruled Zwiers; Zwiers no longer controls |
| Whether a complaint filed before the NOI waiting period tolls the limitations period | Filing a complaint tolls limitations under MCL 600.5856(a) even if premature | Burton, Boodt, Scarsella: premature complaint does not commence action and does not toll limitations | Premature complaints do not toll limitations; dismissal with prejudice where limitations expired is required |
| Whether MCL 600.2301 can cure a prematurely filed complaint (not just defective NOI content) | MCL 600.2301 permits courts to amend pleadings/proceedings to further justice and can save such cases | MCL 600.2301 applies only to pending actions/proceedings; if no action was commenced, §2301 is inapplicable and curing would prejudice defendants | §2301 does not rescue complaints filed before the NOI waiting period expired; applying it would prejudice defendants and is not for the furtherance of justice |
| Adequacy of defendants’ pleading of the NOI-waiting-period affirmative defense | (Tyra plaintiff) Defendants waived the defense by failing to plead grounds with sufficient factual specificity | Defendants relied on Auslander and prior practice that such defenses survive even if not specifically pleaded | Court declined to decide because Tyra plaintiff did not brief the question here; concurrence would have addressed and found some Beaumont defendants’ defenses inadequate, but majority left issue unresolved |
Key Cases Cited
- Burton v. Reed City Hosp. Corp., 471 Mich 745 (2005) (holding a complaint filed before expiration of the NOI waiting period does not commence the action and does not toll limitations)
- Driver v. Naini, 490 Mich 239 (2011) (clarifying Bush applies to defective but timely NOIs; MCL 600.2301 does not apply when no action was commenced and preserved Burton)
- Bush v. Shabahang, 484 Mich 156 (2009) (holding a timely but content-defective NOI may be amended under MCL 600.2301 if made in good faith)
- Boodt v. Borgess Med. Ctr., 481 Mich 558 (2008) (holding a complaint filed after a defective NOI does not toll limitations because plaintiff was not authorized to file the complaint)
- Scarsella v. Pollak, 461 Mich 547 (2000) (an affidavit of merit is mandatory; complaint without it does not commence malpractice suit for statute-of-limitations tolling)
- Zwiers v. Growney, 286 Mich App 38 (2009) (Mich. Ct. App.) (applied Bush and MCL 600.2301 to allow cure of a complaint filed one day early; Court of Appeals ruling later held to be inconsistent with Driver)
- Auslander v. Chernick, 480 Mich 910 (2007) (order) (Court of Appeals posture adopted in prior practice relieving defendants of pleading certain affirmative defenses; its validity questioned in concurrence)