Contract – Hospital privileges – Court of Claims Act

Where a breach of contract claim has been brought over the suspension of the plaintiff’s hospital privileges and the resulting reduction in his salary, the defendants are entitled to summary judgment under the Court of Claims Act.

“Pending before the Court are three motions for summary disposition filed by defendants, the Board of Regents of the University of Michigan (the Board), Michael Mulholland, M.D., Marie Lonzon, M.D., and Justin Dimick, M.D. (the individual defendants). The motions are GRANTED for the reasons stated herein.

“Plaintiff Steven R. Buchman is a tenured professor at the University of Michigan and a surgeon who held clinical privileges at the University of Michigan Hospitals (UMH). He has been employed by the University and UMH for approximately 30 years. This action arises from the suspension of plaintiff’s hospital privileges and the resulting reduction in his salary. Plaintiff’s third amended complaint alleges alleged breach of contract and various tort theories.

“This matter was previously before the Court on motions for summary disposition filed by defendants. The predecessor judge, in a lengthy opinion and order, denied summary disposition in part and granted summary disposition in part to defendants. All that remains from plaintiff’s third amended complaint are: (1) Count I (breach of contract) as against the Board; (2) Count III (IIED) against the individual defendants; and (3) Count V a claim under the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (the ELCRA claim) against all defendants.’

“The Court agrees with the Board that the Court of Claims Act bars much of plaintiff’s contract claim. The Court also agrees with the Board that, to whatever extent the Court of Claims Act does not bar the claim, summary disposition is warranted under MCR 2.116(C)(10).

“Turning to the Board’s motion for summary disposition as to the ELCRA claim, the Court once again concludes that many aspects of the claim are time-barred. Any allegations arising from the Board’s actions that occurred before the finalization of plaintiff’s suspension of privileges in April 2023 which occurred within six months of the complaint filed in this Court are barred as untimely for plaintiff’s failure to comply with 6431.

“The motions for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(7) and (C)(10) are GRANTED for the reasons stated in this opinion and order.”

Buchman v. The Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Michigan; MiLW 04-108146, 15 pages; Court of Claims; Patel, J.

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.

Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.