The Michigan Supreme Court (MSC) will hear oral arguments in eight cases — one of them a malpractice case out of Macomb County — on Wednesday, January 22 at the Michigan Hall of Justice in Lansing.
The session will begin at 9:30 a.m., in the 6th floor courtroom. Oral arguments will be livestreamed from the MSC website.
The notice of cases is posted on the Supreme Court’s oral arguments web page. Those interested can follow the court on X (formerly Twitter) to receive regular updates as cases are heard.
The brief account on the Macomb County case — Giorgio Webster vs. Jeffrey Osguthorpe and Summit Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, PC. — may not reflect the way that some or all of the court’s seven justices view the case, according to the court news release regarding the arguments.
The attorneys may also disagree about the facts, issues, procedural history, and significance of this case.
According to a summary released by the court, the parties participated in case evaluation on Dec. 8, 2020, and the case evaluation panel awarded $199,000 in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff accepted the award, but the defendants rejected it.
Under the version of MCR 2.403(O) in place at that time, the plaintiff could be awarded case evaluation sanctions if he proceeded to trial and the jury’s verdict was more favorable than the case evaluation award.
However, MCR 2.403 was amended effective Jan. 1, 2022, to eliminate case evaluation sanctions.
The case proceeded to trial, and on April 14, 2022, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff resulting in a judgment of $565,000.
The trial court denied the defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or remittitur. The trial court granted the plaintiff’s motion for an award of case evaluation sanctions under the pre-amendment version of MCR 2.403 and added $169,512.54 to the judgment.
The Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, affirmed the trial court’s denial of the defendants’ post-judgment motion but reversed the trial court’s award of case evaluation sanctions.
The defendants filed an application for leave to appeal in the Supreme Court and the plaintiff filed a cross-application for leave to appeal challenging the case evaluation sanctions ruling.
The Supreme Court has ordered oral argument on the cross-application to address: (1) whether the Macomb Circuit Court had the discretion to apply the former MCR 2.403(O); and, if so (2) whether an award of sanctions was justified in this case.
The session will begin at 9:30 a.m., in the 6th floor courtroom. Oral arguments will be livestreamed from the MSC website.
The notice of cases is posted on the Supreme Court’s oral arguments web page. Those interested can follow the court on X (formerly Twitter) to receive regular updates as cases are heard.
The brief account on the Macomb County case — Giorgio Webster vs. Jeffrey Osguthorpe and Summit Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, PC. — may not reflect the way that some or all of the court’s seven justices view the case, according to the court news release regarding the arguments.
The attorneys may also disagree about the facts, issues, procedural history, and significance of this case.
According to a summary released by the court, the parties participated in case evaluation on Dec. 8, 2020, and the case evaluation panel awarded $199,000 in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff accepted the award, but the defendants rejected it.
Under the version of MCR 2.403(O) in place at that time, the plaintiff could be awarded case evaluation sanctions if he proceeded to trial and the jury’s verdict was more favorable than the case evaluation award.
However, MCR 2.403 was amended effective Jan. 1, 2022, to eliminate case evaluation sanctions.
The case proceeded to trial, and on April 14, 2022, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff resulting in a judgment of $565,000.
The trial court denied the defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or remittitur. The trial court granted the plaintiff’s motion for an award of case evaluation sanctions under the pre-amendment version of MCR 2.403 and added $169,512.54 to the judgment.
The Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, affirmed the trial court’s denial of the defendants’ post-judgment motion but reversed the trial court’s award of case evaluation sanctions.
The defendants filed an application for leave to appeal in the Supreme Court and the plaintiff filed a cross-application for leave to appeal challenging the case evaluation sanctions ruling.
The Supreme Court has ordered oral argument on the cross-application to address: (1) whether the Macomb Circuit Court had the discretion to apply the former MCR 2.403(O); and, if so (2) whether an award of sanctions was justified in this case.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
