Teri Walters v. Donald S Falik ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                                        Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    December 15, 2017                                                                                    Stephen J. Markman,
    Chief Justice
    154489 & (86)                                                                                             Brian K. Zahra
    Bridget M. McCormack
    David F. Viviano
    Richard H. Bernstein
    TERI WALTERS and KIM WALTERS,                                                                            Kurtis T. Wilder
    Plaintiffs-Appellees,                                                                     Elizabeth T. Clement,
    Justices
    v                                                                 SC: 154489
    COA: 319016
    Eaton CC: 12-000658-NH
    DONALD S. FALIK, D.D.S., d/b/a FALIK
    FAMILY DENTISTRY, ROBERT C.
    FALIK, D.D.S., and JANE DOE,
    Defendants-Appellants.
    _________________________________________/
    On December 6, 2017, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave
    to appeal the August 16, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court,
    the application is again considered. MCR 7.305(H)(1). In lieu of granting leave to
    appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REINSTATE the order
    of the Eaton Circuit Court granting the defendants’ motion in limine to exclude the
    plaintiffs’ expert’s testimony on causation. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in
    finding that the plaintiffs’ proposed expert witness’s opinion was unreliable, especially
    since the scientific articles presented by the plaintiffs indicated that the etiology of
    Wegener’s granulomatosis (“Wegener’s”) is unknown and that no study has referred to
    an association between phosphoric acid and Wegener’s. Further, the plaintiff’s proposed
    expert failed to explain why phosphoric acid was analogous to other environmental
    factors potentially associated with Wegener’s. The trial court thus did not abuse its
    discretion when it held that his testimony was not sufficiently reliable to proceed to the
    jury because it amounted to speculation. See Elher v Misra, 
    499 Mich. 11
    (2016); Edry v
    Adelman, 
    486 Mich. 634
    , 639 (2010). Defendants’ motion for leave to file a response to
    amicus curiae brief of the Michigan Association for Justice is GRANTED.
    BERNSTEIN, J. (dissenting).
    I would affirm for the reasons stated in the Court of Appeals majority opinion. I
    believe the Court of Appeals majority reached the right result for the right reasons.
    I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
    foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
    December 15, 2017
    p1212
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 154489

Filed Date: 12/15/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/16/2017