 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Summers v. Summers3/20/2003
UNPUBLISHED
In this personal injury action, plaintiff appeals as of right from the judgment of no cause of action in favor defendant and against plaintiff based on the jury's unanimous finding that plaintiff did not have a serious impairment of body function. We affirm.
Plaintiff, in propria persona, contends that her attorney was ineffective because he failed to called witnesses and introduce certain evidence. Plaintiff appears to be making an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. In United States v $100,375 in US Currency, 70 F3d 438, 440 (CA 6, 1995), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals noted that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel is "explicitly confined to 'criminal prosecutions.'" (Citations omitted). Likewise, Const 1963, art 1, ยง 20 states:
In every criminal prosecution, the accused shall have the right to . . . have the assistance of counsel of his or her defense . . . . [Emphasis added.]
We conclude that plaintiff's claim must fail because this right applies to criminal proceedings, and not the civil case at hand.
Plaintiff next contends that the doctors who treated her after her accident deviated from the standard of care. Plaintiff has provided no authority, however, demonstrating that these claims of medical malpractice may be raised and resolved for the first time here on appeal. A bald assertion without supporting authority precludes this Court from examining such an issue. Impullitti v Impullitti, 163 Mich App 507, 509; 415 NW2d 261 (1987) (citing People v Noble, 152 Mich App 319, 328; 393 NW2d 619 (1986)). Therefore, we decline to examine this issue.
Plaintiff also contends that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that she suffered a serious impairment, and that the jury verdict should be set aside. MCR 2.610(A)(1) states that within twenty-one days after the entry of judgment, a party may move to have the verdict and judgment set aside, and to have judgment entered in the moving party's favor. In this case, plaintiff failed to file such a motion. Therefore, plaintiff failed to preserve this argument. In addition, plaintiff has failed to show that a miscarriage of justice or manifest injustice will occur if we decline to address this issue. See Napier v Jacobs, 429 Mich 222; 414 NW2d 862 (1987).
Plaintiff also contends that defendant's attorney presented altered evidence, made false statements that inflamed the jury, and tried to persuade his client to lie under oath regarding the speed of the vehicle traveling in front of defendant at the time of the accident.
When reviewing an appeal asserting improper conduct of an attorney, we first determine whether the claimed error was in fact error, and if so, whether it was harmless. Reetz v Kinsman Marine Transit Co, 416 Mich 97, 103; 330 NW2d 638 (1982). However, if the improper conduct was not objected to, we review for plain error. Kern v Blethen-Coluni, 240 Mich App 333, 336; 612 NW2d 838 (2000) (citing MRE 103(d)). Plaintiff did not object below.
Plaintiff argues that defendant's attorney misled the jury by making the following statements in his opening argument:
The more important question really for this case is, what injuries are from this accident. There's no dispute that Mrs. Summers had a fractured nose. She goes to the emergency room. And in fact, that's the only thing she's complaining of at the emergency room.
In Taylor v Klahm, 40 Mich App 255, 261; 198 NW2d 715 (1972) (citations omitted), this Court noted that considerable latitude is allowed counsel in outlining to the jury the evidence to be submitted, and that what constitutes a fair opening st
Page 1 2 Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|