Case ID: mich-app_14/html/0289-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ASHLEY v. ST. JOSEPH MERCY HOSPITAL OF DETROIT
    Appeal from Macomb, Noe (Alton H.), J.
    Submitted Division 2 November 14, 1968, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 2,894.)
    Decided November 26, 1968.
    Leave to appeal denied March 14, 1969.
    381 Mich 807.
    Complaint by John Louis Ashley, a minor, by Louis J. Ashley, his nest friend, against St. Joseph Mercy Hospital of Detroit, a Michigan corporation, and Dr. Irving I. Levitt, to recover for personal injuries. Summary judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      James II. Uudnut, for plaintiff.
    
      Moll, Desenberg, Purdy, Glover <& Bayer (Louis A. Kitch and Lowell G. Stellberger, of counsel), for defendant St. Joseph Mercy Hospital.
    
      Alexander, Buchanan & Conklin (Floyd S. Wescott and Norman S. Sommers, of counsel), for defendant Dr. Irving Levitt.
   Per Curiam.

The trial court entered a pretrial statement allowing the plaintiff 15 days to amend the complaint if desired, and 30 days to file a bill of particulars. Plaintiff failed to comply with the order and defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. At the hearing, plaintiff elected to stand on his original complaint and after the trial judge indicated he would enter a summary judgment, plaintiff asked to amend the complaint. The court ruled that there had been considerable dereliction in the filing of an amended complaint, denied the request, and granted defendant’s summary judgment.

As stated in Kromat v. Vestevich (1968), 14 Mich App 291, the pretrial statement controls the subsequent course of action in a case. The statement must be considered an order of the court. In view of plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to allow plaintiff to amend his complaint at such a late date and granting a summary judgment.

Affirmed. Costs to defendants.

Fitzgerald, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Robinson,. JJ., concurred.