Opinion ID: 848702
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: MCL 600.2912b(4)(e): PROXIMATE CAUSE

Text: Plaintiff's notices of intent fail to satisfy the requirement of § 2912b(4)(e) that the notice contain a statement of [t]he manner in which it is alleged the breach of the standard of practice or care was the proximate cause of the injury claimed in the notice. The Court of Appeals held that plaintiff clearly states that the misdiagnosis resulted in having to have emergency surgery four days later to remove her only remaining fallopian tube as a result of the tube bursting from the undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy, thus rendering her sterile. This is clearly a statement of the manner in which it is alleged that the breach of the standard of practice or care proximately caused the injury. [252 Mich.App. at 673, 653 N.W.2d 441.] We disagree with the assertion that plaintiff clearly state[d] that a misdiagnosis by any of the defendants resulted in her fallopian tube bursting and in her ensuing sterility. Nowhere in the notices does plaintiff state that any of the defendants misdiagnosed her condition; nor do the notices state any consequences stemming from a misdiagnosis. Indeed, the reader is left to wonder whether plaintiff is alleging that a diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy could have been made in time to avoid the rupture of her tube, or whether she is alleging that her tube ruptured as a direct result of her treatment by defendants DesNoyers and Davis on October 4, 1996. [16] With no specific allegations regarding the conduct of any of the named defendants, the notices are insufficient to meet the particularized requirements of § 2912b(4)(e). [17]