SENATE BILL No. 1116

 

 

May 3, 2012, Introduced by Senators MEEKHOF, MOOLENAAR and SMITH and referred to the Committee on Insurance.

 

 

 

     A bill to amend 1961 PA 236, entitled

 

"Revised judicature act of 1961,"

 

by amending section 2912a (MCL 600.2912a), as amended by 1993 PA

 

78.

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

 

     Sec. 2912a. (1) Subject to subsection subsections (2) and (3),

 

in an action alleging malpractice, the plaintiff has the burden of

 

proving that in light of the state of the art existing at the time

 

of the alleged malpractice:

 

     (a) The defendant, if a general practitioner, failed to

 

provide the plaintiff the recognized standard of acceptable

 

professional practice or care in the community in which the

 

defendant practices or in a similar community, and that as a

 

proximate result of the defendant failing to provide that standard,

 

the plaintiff suffered an injury.


 

     (b) The defendant, if a specialist, failed to provide the

 

recognized standard of practice or care within that specialty as

 

reasonably applied in light of the facilities available in the

 

community or other facilities reasonably available under the

 

circumstances, and as a proximate result of the defendant failing

 

to provide that standard, the plaintiff suffered an injury.

 

     (2) In an action alleging medical malpractice, the plaintiff

 

has the burden of proving that he or she suffered an injury that

 

more probably than not was proximately caused by the negligence of

 

the defendant or defendants. In an action alleging medical

 

malpractice, the plaintiff cannot recover for loss of an

 

opportunity to survive or an opportunity to achieve a better

 

result. unless the opportunity was greater than 50%.

 

     (3) A person described in section 5838a(1) is not liable in an

 

action alleging medical malpractice if the person's conduct at

 

issue constituted the exercise of professional judgment. For

 

purposes of this subsection, a person exercises professional

 

judgment if the person acts with a reasonable and good-faith belief

 

that the person's conduct is both well founded in medicine and in

 

the best interests of the patient. In an action described in this

 

subsection, all of the following apply:

 

     (a) The issue of whether an act or omission was an exercise of

 

professional judgment is a question of law for the court.

 

     (b) If the court determines under subdivision (a) that the

 

person described in section 5838a(1) did not meet the burden of

 

proving that the act or omission was an exercise of professional

 

judgment, the question of whether the person failed to provide the


 

recognized standard of acceptable professional practice or care is

 

a question for the trier of fact to decide. The ruling of the court

 

under subdivision (a) is inadmissible as evidence at trial, and the

 

court shall not permit the parties' counsel to argue any provision

 

of this subsection to a jury.