Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gonzalez v. St John Hospital & Medical Centergreen2 sentences2018As part of this inquiry under MCL 600.2169(2), trial courts must evaluate, at a minimum, the following: (a) The educational and professional training of the expert witness. (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty. (d) The relevancy of the expert witness’s testimony. (3) This section does not limit the power of the trial court to disqualify an expert witness on grounds other than the qualifications set forth in this section. -11- When 2018As part of this inquiry under MCL 600.2169(2), trial courts must evaluate, at a minimum, the following: (a) The educational and professional training of the expert witness. (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty. (d) The relevancy of the expert witness’s testimony. (3) This section does not limit the power of the trial court to disqualify an expert witness on grounds other than the qualifications set forth in this section. -11- When | 2 | 2 |
Gay v. Select Specialty Hospitalgreen1 sentence2024See MCL 600.2169(1)(b); Gay, 295 Mich App at 294-300 (explaining what constitutes active clinical practice and instruction sufficient to meet the statutory requirements). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rock v. Crocker
green
2 sentences2018A. SUBSTANTIVE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE CHALLENGED EXPERT TESTIMONY As explained in Rock, 499 Mich at 260 , “[a] physician who testifies regarding the standard of care at issue must satisfy the requirements of MCL 600.2169(1).” Pursuant to MCL 600.2169(2), when determining the qualifications of an expert witness in an action alleging medical malpractice, the court shall, at a minimum, evaluate all of the following: (a) The educational and professional training of the expert witness. (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. -5- (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged 2018A. SUBSTANTIVE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE CHALLENGED EXPERT TESTIMONY As explained in Rock, 499 Mich at 260 , “[a] physician who testifies regarding the standard of care at issue must satisfy the requirements of MCL 600.2169(1).” Pursuant to MCL 600.2169(2), when determining the qualifications of an expert witness in an action alleging medical malpractice, the court shall, at a minimum, evaluate all of the following: (a) The educational and professional training of the expert witness. (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. -5- (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Elher v. Misra
green
2 sentences2017MRE 702 “requires the circuit court to ensure that each aspect of an expert witness’s testimony, including the underlying data and methodology, is reliable.” Elher, 499 Mich at 22 . 2017MRE 702 “requires the circuit court to ensure that each aspect of an expert witness’s testimony, including the underlying data and methodology, is reliable.” Elher, 499 Mich at 22 . | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Gilbert v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
green
2 sentences2006Gilbert, supra at 780 n 46. 22 (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty. (d) The relevancy of the expert witness’s testimony. 2006Gilbert, supra at 780 n 46. 22 (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty. (d) The relevancy of the expert witness’s testimony. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Johanna Woodard v. University of Mich Medical Ctr
green
1 sentence2019Woodard, 476 Mich at 565-566 . -6- Finally, we take note of the language in MCL 600.2169(2), which, in the process of determining the qualifications of an expert witness, requires a court to evaluate “[t]he length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty.” MCL 600.2169(2)(c)(emphasis added). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Halloran v. Bhan
green
1 sentence2016Those provisions state: -6- (2) In determining the qualifications of an expert witness in an action alleging medical malpractice, the court shall, at a minimum, evaluate all of the following: (a) The educational and professional training of the expert witness. (b) The area of specialization of the expert witness. (c) The length of time the expert witness has been engaged in the active clinical practice or instruction of the health profession or the specialty. (d) The relevancy of the expert witness’s testimony. (3) This section does not limit the power of the trial court to disqualify an exper | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.