Listen to this article
Where the defendants in a medical malpractice action were awarded summary disposition, there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding causation and the trial court erred by concluding otherwise.
Reversed and remanded.
“In this medical malpractice action, plaintiff-appellant, Felicia Buchanan as the personal representative of the estate of Ernestine Davis, appeals by leave granted the trial court’s order granting summary disposition to defendants-appellees, Saiyeda N. Abbas, M.D., and her employer, Independent Emergency Physicians, PC (‘IEP’). The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s claims of negligence and vicarious liability against the respective Abbas defendants on the ground that she failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact whether Dr. Abbas’s alleged negligence proximately caused the death of Ernestine Davis. Viewing the record evidence in a light favorable to plaintiff as the nonmoving party, we conclude there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding causation and the trial court erred by concluding otherwise. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. …
“This appeal stems from the death of Davis, a 73-year-old woman, following strokes she suffered while a patient at Ascension Providence Hospital in Southfield, Michigan. …
“Plaintiff argues the trial court erred by granting summary disposition to the Abbas defendants. Plaintiff contends that she demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact on the causation element of her medical malpractice claims. We agree. …
“… In both the trial court and on appeal, the Abbas defendants focused on the fact that Davis’s symptoms were minor when she presented to Dr. Abbas and she was not a candidate for mechanical intervention while she was in the ER. Both of these contentions are supported by the record evidence; however, plaintiff’s theory of causation is premised on the assertion that the extent of Davis’s stroke was discoverable during her time under Dr. Abbas’s care and had Dr. Abbas performed the appropriate testing, she would have been admitted to a neurological critical care unit where she would have received appropriate monitoring and prompt treatment. Both Dr. Venkat and Dr. Zoarski testified that had the CT angiogram been performed in the ER, Davis would have been monitored more closely, and, when her condition started to deteriorate, she would have been promptly and appropriately treated, such that she would have survived with a chance of recovery of function. The evidence sets forth substantial specific facts to support a reasonable inference of a logical sequence of cause and effect. …
“It is apparent the trial court failed to consider all of the testimony of Dr. Venkat and Dr. Zoarski. … On this record, a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding causation. Viewed in a light most favorable to plaintiff as the nonmoving party, the evidence supported a conclusion that but for Dr. Abbas’s failure to order a CT angiogram and failure to order a code stroke, Davis would have been monitored more closely and when her condition deteriorated, she would have undergone a thrombectomy or other appropriate treatment such that she would not have suffered the major stroke and died. … This evidence was not too attenuated to be speculative, but rather set forth substantial specific facts to support a reasonable inference of a logical sequence of cause and effect. … Therefore, the trial court erred by granting summary disposition in favor of the Abbas defendants.”
