Medical malpractice; Craig v. Oakwoood Hosp.; Proximate cause; Skinner v. Square D Co.; Allard v. State Farm Ins. Co.; Credibility; Guerrero v. Smith; Hearsay; Records; MRE 803(9); MCL 333.2886; Principle that the facts contained in a death certificate are merely prima facie evidence that may be rebutted by contrary evidence; Kowalski v. Iron Workers Local No. 25 Pension Fund (Unpub. ED MI); “Prima facie evidence” defined; American Cas. Co. v. Costello

The court held that the trial court did not err in entering an order for “no cause of action” against the defendant-emergency room physician in the plaintiff-estate’s action alleging medical malpractice. Late in the evening on the day of her gallbladder surgery, the decedent experienced pain in her side and went to the emergency room where defendant found no evidence that she suffered from a post-operative infection or bowel perforation and discharged her with instructions that she see her general surgeon if the pain worsened. She did as instructed, but the general surgeon also found no evidence of any problems. However, the pain persisted and follow-up surgery was eventually performed, revealing a small bowel perforation, which was repaired. She died in her sleep five days after she was discharged from the hospital following that surgery. Plaintiff sued defendant claiming he was negligent in discharging the decedent from the emergency room, given her symptoms and recent gallbladder surgery. The case proceeded to trial, but the trial court entered a no-cause of action against defendant. On appeal, the court found that “[t]he jury’s determination that defendant acted below the standard of care in one or more ways plaintiff alleged did not compel a finding that [the decedent’s] injury was the result of defendant’s negligence.” Further, “[t]o the extent plaintiff argues that the jury simply got it wrong and should have rendered a verdict for plaintiff, there was ample competent evidence to support the jury’s verdict.” The court also rejected the estate’s claim that the trial court erred in permitting defendant to raise alternative theories of cause of death, noting that defendant was permitted to rebut the presumption that the death certificate contained a presumption as to the decedent’s death, and that “while the certified cause of death was presumptively correct, it was only prima facie evidence and could be rebutted.” Affirmed.