# Elher v. Misra

> Michigan Supreme Court · February 8, 2016 · 499 Mich. 11

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9821514

## Case

- **Full name:** Paulette Elher v. Dwijen Misra Jr Md
- **Court:** Michigan Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 8, 2016
- **Citations:** 499 Mich. 11; 878 N.W.2d 790
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bernstein
- **Judges:** Bernstein, Larsen, Markman, McCormack, Per Curiam, Viviano, Young, Zahra
- **Cited by:** 176 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/9821514

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and explaining that, although “peer-reviewed, published literature is not always necessary or sufficient to meet the requirements of MRE 702, the lack of supporting literature, combined with the lack of any other form o…
- holding that where the “breach of the standard of care is [not] so obvious to a layperson that no expert testimony is required, ... expert testimony [will be needed] to prove the applicable standard of care and a breach of that standard of care”
- holding that the proponent of expert testimony must establish that his or her experts are qualified
- affirming a trial court’s grant of summary disposition to a defendant doctor because the opinion testimony of the plaintiff’s proposed expert would have been inadmissible at trial under MRE 702

## Opinion text

BERNSTEIN, J.
(dissenting). I would affirm for the reasons stated in the Court of Appeals majority opinion. I believe the Court of Appeals reached the right result for the right reasons.
LARSEN, J., took no part in the decision of this case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9821514. Public record. Not legal advice.