# Grossman v. Brown

> Michigan Supreme Court · July 20, 2004 · 470 Mich. 593

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9504420

## Case

- **Full name:** Grossman v. Brown
- **Court:** Michigan Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 20, 2004
- **Citations:** 470 Mich. 593; 685 N.W.2d 198
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Weaver
- **Judges:** Weaver, Young, Markman, Taylor, Kelly, Cavanagh
- **Cited by:** 63 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9504420

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- discussing the differing statutory standards governing, respectively, the admission of an expert's standard-of-care testimony at trial and the adequacy of an expert's affidavit of merit
- explaining that counsel’s reasonable belief regarding an expert’s qualification does not control whether the expert can testify at trial

## Opinion text

WEAVER, J.
(concurring in result only). I concur with the majority only in its conclusion that, in this case, plaintiffs attorney had a reasonable belief that plaintiffs medical expert met the requirements for filing an affidavit of merit under MCL 600.2912d. I write separately to clarify, as I explain in my dissenting opinion in Halloran v Bhan, 470 Mich 572 ; 683 NW2d 129 (2004) (WEAVER, J. dissenting), that MCL 600.2169 requires that a standard-of-care expert’s board certifications and specialties match those of the defendant only where the specialty or board certification is appropriate for (correct for the purpose of explaining) the standard of care to which the expert will be testifying in the case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9504420. Public record. Not legal advice.