Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 126980 & (80) Michael F. Cavanagh 127032 Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JOSEPH STAMPLIS and THEODORA Stephen J. Markman, STAMPLIS, Justices Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 126980 COA: 241801 St. Clair CC: 01-001051-NH ST. JOHN HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a RIVER DISTRICT HOSPITAL, Defendant-Appellant, and

G. PHILLIP DOUGLASS, Defendant-Appellee, and

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a HENRY FORD HOSPITAL, et al Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

JOSEPH STAMPLIS and THEODORA STAMPLIS, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 127032 COA: 241801 St. Clair CC: 01-001051-NH ST. JOHN HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a RIVER DISTRICT HOSPITAL, Defendant-Appellee, and

G. PHILLIP DOUGLASS, Defendant-Appellant, and

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a HENRY FORD HOSPITAL, et al Defendants.

_____________ _______________ _____________/_______________________________________ __ 2

On December 15, 2005, the Court heard oral argument on the applications for leave to appeal the June 1, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the motion to disqualif y is DENIED. The applications for leave to appeal are again considered, and they are GRANTED. MCR 7.302(G)(1). The parties are directed to include among the issues briefed the impact, if any, of the 1995 amendment of MCL 600.2925d on the current viability of Theophelis v Lansing General Hospital , 430 Mich 473 (1988).

The Michigan Trial Lawyers Association and Michigan Defense Trial Counsel are
invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or grou ps interested in the determination of the questions presented in this case may m ove the Court for permission
to file briefs amicus curiae.

K ELLY , J., concurs in part and dissents in part and states as follows:

While I agree to grant leave to appeal, I do not participat e in the decision to deny the motion to disqualify. I ag ree with Justice Weaver in urgi ng the Court to establish a particularized procedure to handle motions to disqualify a Supreme Court Justice from participation in a case.

W EAVER , J., not participating in the decisi on regarding the motion to disqualify Chief Justice Taylor and Justices Corrigan, Young, and Markman, dissents and states as
follows:

I am opposed to the entry of any order in this case at this time and would hold this case in abeyance until this Cour t publishes proposals for pub lic comment, places the issue on a public hearing for administrative matters, resolves, and makes clear for all to know the proper procedures for handling motions for the disqualification of Supreme Court Justices from participation in a case. This Court opened an administrative file on the question on May 20, 2003, but has yet to addre ss the matter further. See ADM 2003-26.

The question regarding the p articipation or nonparticipa tion of Justices frequently recurs and is a matter of public significan ce because even one Ju stice’s decision to participate or not participate can affect th e decision and outcome in a case. See Advocacy Org for Patients & Providers v Auto Club Ins Ass’n, 472 Mich 91 (2005) (Weaver, J., concurring).

d0124 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 27, 2006

Clerk