Where summary disposition was awarded to the defendants in a wrongful death medical malpractice action, that judgment should be affirmed based on an absence of expert testimony to establish causation.
“This is a professional negligence action that returns to this Court for a second time. Plaintiff, Anise Patterson, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Ronald Patterson, appeals from a final order granting summary disposition in favor of defendants Dr. Gerald Dreslinski and Internal Medical Specialists of Howell (the IMS defendants). Plaintiff also appeals the trial court’s earlier order granting summary disposition in favor of St. Joseph Mercy Hospital-Ann Arbor (SJM-AA) and Trinity Health-Michigan (together, the SJM defendants). On appeal, plaintiff argues that the trial court erred by concluding that she did not present evidence sufficient to establish the element of causation. She also raises several challenges to the trial court’s rulings on discovery matters, and contends that the trial court erred by prematurely setting a trial date. For reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court’s orders granting summary disposition in favor of the SJM and IMS defendants.
“Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred by granting summary disposition in favor of the SJM defendants on the basis that plaintiff did not establish that the critical care nurses’ delayed recognition and response to Patterson’s extravasation injury was a proximate cause of an increase in Patterson’s pain and suffering and, eventually, of his death.
“Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition of plaintiff’s wrongful-death claim in favor of the SJM defendants. Plaintiff failed to meet her burden to set forth specific facts to establish a causal nexus between the extravasation, the SJM-AA nurses’ alleged untimely response to the extravasation, and Patterson’s death.
“In conclusion, there is no dispute that the injury to Patterson’s arm was caused by an extravasation, and the picture of Patterson’s injury leaves no reasonable room to doubt that it was significant. Michigan medical malpractice jurisprudence requires plaintiff to have expert medical testimony to establish that the nurses’ alleged negligence caused the worsening of Patterson’s extravasation injury and the resultant pain and suffering. In the absence of expert testimony to establish causation, plaintiff cannot show that the trial court erred by granting summary disposition in favor of the SJM defendants.
“Plaintiff also contends that the trial court erred by granting summary disposition in favor of the IMS defendants because she did not establish that Dr. Dreslinski’s resuming Patterson’s Xarelto prescription, although at a lower dosage, was a proximate cause of Patterson’s massive gastrointestinal bleed on January 25 and, eventually, of his death.
“At issue is whether plaintiff met her burden to establish that Dr. Dreslinski’s restarting Patterson’s Xarelto prescription was more likely than not a cause of Patterson’s January 25 bleed and eventual death.
“The testimony of plaintiff’s medical expert established only a correlation between Xarelto and Patterson’s internal bleeding and failed to exclude other reasonable hypotheses regarding the bleeding with a fair amount of certainty. Accordingly, plaintiff failed to establish that, but-for Dr. Dreslinski’s resumption of Patterson’s Xarelto prescription, Patterson would not have suffered internal bleeding on January 25. Without establishing that Dr. Dreslinski committed medical malpractice, plaintiff cannot sustain a wrongful-death action against the IMS defendants. We conclude, therefore, that the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition of plaintiff’s claims in favor of the IMS defendants.”
Patterson v. St. Joseph Mercy Hosp. Ann Arbor; MiLW 08-108109, 10 pages; Michigan Court of Appeals unpublished per curiam; Murray, J., Riordan, J., D. H. Sawyer, J.; on appeal from Washtenaw Circuit Court; Darlene B. Gricius for appellant; Enrico G. Tucciarone for appellee.
Click here to read the full text of the opinion.
Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.
Most Popular
Comments / 0