According to the Michigan medical malpractice wrongful death complaint, Linda Walsh began seeing Dr. John Shaird in 2008 for treatment of chronic pain. Dr. Shaird prescribed several different medications during their professional
relationship which lasted nine years.
Plaintiff alleged that Dr. Shaird continued prescribing the same doses of numerous narcotic drugs despite the facts that Walsh had a history of both alcohol and prescription drug abuse and had recently undergone significant weight loss during that time. Moreover, Walsh had reportedly told family members that she and Dr. Shaird had a sexual
relationship.
Dr. Shaird last treated Walsh on March 2, 2017. Walsh was found dead five days later. Following an autopsy, it was determined that the cause of death was an overdose. At the time of her death, Walsh only weighed 100 lbs.
Walsh’s estate did not file its Michigan medical malpractice wrongful death complaint until February 26, 2021, nearly four years after Walsh’s death and well outside the applicable limitations period. However, plaintiff argued that the complaint was timely filed because of the Michigan Supreme Court’s COVID-19 tolling orders. Defendants filed a motion seeking summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(7). The trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary disposition. Plaintiff appealed.
The State of Michigan Court of Appeals (“Michigan Appellate Court”) stated in its unpublished Per Curiam opinion dated April 11, 2024: “In this case, plaintiff’s claim of medical malpractice accrued on March 2, 2017, because that was the last date that Walsh was treated by Dr. Shaird. See MCL 600.5838a(1). Pursuant to MCL 600.5805(8), the limitations period for plaintiff’s claims would have expired on March 2, 2019 because the statutory period of limitations for plaintiff’s claim is generally two years. However, because Walsh died before the period of limitations had run, and the letters of authority were issued to Walsh’s estate on December 27, 2018, the period of limitations was extended to December 27, 2020. See MCL 600.5852. Plaintiff filed this complaint on February 26, 2021, which ordinarily would be outside even this extended limitations period.”
“[I]t is clear from the plain language of AO 2020-3 that the Supreme Court intended that all limitation periods pertaining to the initiation of an action be tolled irrespective of whether they were set to expire during the tolling period … It would have been easy for the Supreme Court to clarify that its intent was only to extend all deadlines set to expire during the state of emergency, and we decline defendants’ invitation to read such language into the order. We also note the practical implications that such an interpretation would have had absent the benefit of hindsight: if AO 2020-3 was restricted to those deadlines set to expire during the state of emergency, then filers would have had no way of knowing whether their deadlines were tolled because it was unclear at that time how long the state of emergency would last.”
“The trial court erred by failing to exclude the 102-day stay period from its calculation of when the applicable limitations period expired. Additionally, defendants’ argument that the Supreme Court lacked the authority to toll the statute of limitations is without merit.”
Source Estate of Linda S Walsh v Ambulatory Surgery Assoc, LLC, Docket No. 360780.
If you or a loved one were harmed as a result of medical negligence in Michigan or in another U.S. state, you should find a Michigan medical malpractice lawyer, or a medical malpractice lawyer in your U.S. state, who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click on the “Contact Us Now” tab to the right, visit our website, or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice attorneys in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
