Pamela Sutherland v. DCC Litigation Facility, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1DissentSutton, Circuit Judge
At issue is whether Michigan’s statute of limitations bars Pamela Sutherland’s lawsuit to recover for injuries caused by allegedly defective breast implants. It does. Michigan does not have a discovery rule, and as a result its three-year limitations period started running at the time of Sutherland’s surgery — June 1, 1988. See Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5805(13); Trentadue v. Buckler Lawn Sprinkler, 479 Mich. 378, 738 N.W.2d 664, 672 (2007). That gave her until June 1991 to file suit. She waited until January 1993 to file the action. That was too late.
The majority reaches a different conclusion…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Boudreau v. BaughmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- Pembee Mfg. Corp. v. Cape Fear Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- CenTra, Inc. v. EstrinCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- Moll v. Abbott LaboratoriesMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.