Legal Opinion

Morgan v. Taylor

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1990No. 83071, (Calendar No. 2)PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, J.

In this malpractice action it is alleged that an examination of plaintiff’s eyes revealed glaucoma symptoms, but the examining optometrist failed to refer plaintiff to an ophthalmologist. When plaintiff returned for his next routine checkup more than two years later, he was referred to a specialist and learned that he had severe glaucoma which should have been treated much earlier.

We must decide whether plaintiff’s malpractice action is barred by the two-year statute of limitations, a question which turns on when his claim accrued. The statute then in effect provided that such a claim accrues…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Melia v. Employment Security CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. McGillenMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
  3. De Haan v. WinterMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Johnson v. CaldwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Dyke v. RichardMichigan Supreme Court · 1973

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Sander v. Geib, Elston, Frost Professional Ass'nSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Head v. Phillips Camper Sales & Rental, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  3. Kincaid v. CardwellMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. Faircloth v. Family Independence AgencyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. Ameriwood Industries International Corp. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1997

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API