Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Dyer v. Trachtman

3/13/2003

thus may not be held liable for professional negligence, but is required to perform the examination in such a manner so as not to injure the examinee. [Id.]


Greenberg and Ramirez find support, albeit in dicta, in a number of cases from other jurisdictions. We find these precedents to be persuasive. A physician conducting an IME does not enter into a physician-patient relationship with the examinee. Thus, the law does not impose any general duty to examine, diagnose or treat the examinee in a professional manner, at the risk of liability for malpractice. Nonetheless, the physician does voluntarily accept a much lesser duty to conduct the IME in a manner that will not affirmatively cause physical harm to the examinee during the examination. Accordingly, a physician can be liable if, because of the physician's negligence, the IME results in such harm to the examinee.


In Ramirez, supra at 763-764, the court concluded that the duty not to injure is a "strict duty" that is violated whenever physical harm occurs during an IME. We disagree. Liability cannot be imposed against a physician who does nothing negligent, just because some physical injury occurs during an IME, without any further analysis. The factfinder must determine what actually occurred during the IME and decide whether physical injury proximately resulted from some negligent act on the part of the physician. The present case is illustrative as it presents many questions regarding what plaintiff told defendant, what defendant did during the IME, whether defendant's actions were negligent and how defendant's actions related to any injury suffered by plaintiff.


We affirm the trial court's order granting summary disposition against plaintiff's original complaint that alleged professional negligence (medical malpractice). We reverse the order denying plaintiff's motion to file an amended complaint alleging ordinary negligence and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We do not retain jurisdiction.


Richard A. Bandstra


Jessica R. Cooper


Michael J. Talbot






Page 1 2 3 

Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE