# Wiley v. Henry Ford Cottage Hospital

> Michigan Court of Appeals · September 9, 2003 · 257 Mich. App. 488

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9659387

## Case

- **Full name:** Wiley v. Henry Ford Cottage Hospital
- **Court:** Michigan Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** September 9, 2003
- **Citations:** 257 Mich. App. 488; 668 N.W.2d 402
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Kelly
- **Judges:** Jansen, Kelly, Hood
- **Cited by:** 121 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/9659387

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “this Court recognizes the unique opportunity of the jury and the trial judge to observe witnesses and the fact-finder’s responsibility to determine the credibility and weight of the testimony”
- holding that Zdrojewski's decision regarding the constitutionality of the caps was incorrect and should be overruled but that the court was bound to follow Zdrojewski's precedent
- stating that a party may not “leave it to this Court. . . to . . . unravel or elaborate its argument. . . .”
- explaining that “the trial court’s inquiry” under MCR 2.611(A)(1) should consider “the evidence presented”
- recognizing the unique opportunity of those observing witnesses to assess their credibility

## Opinion text

Kelly, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I agree with the majority’s opinion in all respects other than, its conclusion that this Court’s decision in Zdrojewski v Murphy, 254 Mich App 50, 74-82 ; 657 NW2d 721 (2002), was incorrect and should be overruled. To the contrary, I agree with the reasoning and analysis applied by Judge Bandstra in his opinion in Zdrojewski , as well as that of Judge Hoekstra in Phillips v Mirac, Inc, 251 Mich App 586 ; 651 NW2d 437 (2002). The statutory cap on noneconomic damages set forth in MCL 600.1483 does not violate the Michigan Constitution.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9659387. Public record. Not legal advice.