GLISSON v. GERRITY, 480 Mich. 883 (2007)

738 N.W.2d 237

No. 133991.Supreme Court of Michigan.
September 21, 2007.

SC: 133991, COA: 264433, Wayne CC: 04-416578-NH.

Actions on Applications for Leave to Appeal from the Court of Appeals.

Summary Dispositions September 21, 2007:

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we reverse part IV(A) of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and we vacate parts III and IV(B) of the judgment as unnecessary in light of our reversal of part IV(A). The Court of Appeals held that the plaintiff’s June 2, 2004, complaint should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Geralds v Munson Healthcare, 259 Mich App 225 (2003), and Mouradian v Goldberg, 256 Mich App 566 (2003). We overrule Geralds and Mouradian in Kirkaldy v Rim, 478 Mich 581 (2007). As Kirkaldy states, “[u]nder MCL 600.5856(a) and MCL 600.2912d, the period of limitations is tolled when a complaint and affidavit of merit are filed and served on the defendant.” Kirkaldy, 478 Mich 585. Even a defective affidavit of merit will “toll the period of limitations until the validity of the affidavit is successfully challenged in `subsequent judicial proceedings.'”Id. at 586. In this case, the limitations period was tolled when the plaintiff filed and served the June 2, 2004, complaint and affidavit of merit. As a result, the limitations period had not expired when the plaintiff filed and served the August 9, 2005, amended complaint, accompanied by the June 3, 2005, amended affidavit of merit. Accordingly, we dismiss without prejudice those claims concerning Dianne Gerrity, M.D., in the June 2, 2004, complaint, and we remand this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for further proceedings with regard to the amended pleadings. In all other respects, leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.