HEATHER SWANSON V PORT HURON HOSP
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
HEATHER SWANSON,
UNPUBLISHED
June 2, 2009
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
PORT HURON HOSPITAL, a/k/a PORT HURON
HOSPITAL MEDICAL GROUP,
No. 275404
St. Clair Circuit Court
LC No. 04-002438-NH
Defendant,
and
JEANNIE L. ROWE, D.O., and BLUEWATER
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, P.C.,
Defendants-Appellants.
HEATHER SWANSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
PORT HURON HOSPITAL, a/k/a PORT HURON
HOSPITAL MEDICAL GROUP,
Defendant,
and
JEANNIE L. ROWE, D.O., and BLUEWATER
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, P.C.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Before: Whitbeck, P.J., and O’Connell and Owens, JJ.
-1-
No. 278491
St. Clair Circuit Court
LC No. 04-002438-NH
O’CONNELL, J. (dissenting).
For the same reasons stated in my dissent in Miller v Malik, 280 Mich App 687, 700-707;
760 NW2d 818 (2008), application for leave to appeal held in abeyance ___ Mich ___; 764
NW2d 231 (2009), I respectfully dissent as to the majority’s conclusion that the notice of intent
is defective in this case. Needless to say, I believe this Court wrongly decided Miller.
The majority opinion relies on Bush v Shabahang, 278 Mich App 703, 753 NW2d 271
(2008), lv gtd in part 482 Mich 1105 (2008), and Miller, supra, to conclude that the notice of
intent in the present case is defective. The Supreme Court has granted leave in Bush and is
holding Miller in abeyance until it decides Bush. It would seem to me that the Supreme Court’s
anticipated decisions in both Miller and Bush would be outcome-determinative in this case, and
that the most prudent solution would be to hold this case in abeyance pending our Supreme
Court’s decisions in Miller and Bush. At this time I voice no opinion as to the balance of the
trial court’s decisions in this case. Should our Supreme Court reverse Bush or Miller, and should
this case be remanded to this Court, I will address the balance of the issues raised on appeal at
that time.
I would affirm only that part of the lower court decision that concluded the notice of
intent was not defective.
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
