Legal Opinion

McKinstry v. Valley Obstetrics-Gynecology Clinic, PC

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 8, 1985No. Docket 78811PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

In our first opinion in this matter, we held that the medical malpractice arbitration act, MCL 600.5040 et seq.; MSA 27A.5040 et seq., was unconstitutional because the statutory agreement form failed to advise patients of the arbitration panel’s statutorily mandated composition. Chief Judge Danhof dissented. 120 Mich App 479; 327 NW2d 507 (1982). In light of Morris v Metriyakool, 418 Mich 423; 344 NW2d 736 (1984), the Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded to us to consider plaintiffs’ remaining issues. 419 Mich 873 (1984). The case is now before us following our remand to the trial…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Morris v. MetriyakoolMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Brown v. SiangMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Cushman v. FrankelMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  4. Horn v. CookeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Moore v. FragatosMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McKinstry v. Valley Obstetrics-Gynecology Clinic, PCMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Kunath v. Sinai HospitalMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. Osborne v. ArringtonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. Guertin v. MarrellaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. McKinstry v. Valley Obstetrics-Gynecology Clinic, PCMichigan Supreme Court · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API