Medical malpractice lawsuits are complicated legal cases. Not only are multiple doctors, nurses, and other medical staff involved in many medical procedures, but the location of the malpractice is also important. When a doctor commits malpractice during patient care, the hospital can also be held responsible for the underlying doctor’s negligence. The Michigan medical malpractice lawyers at the Lee Steinberg Law Firm have represented the injured and their families for decades. Hospital liability is a valuable and important tool in many medical negligence cases.

Can a Hospital Be Held Negligent in a Medical Malpractice Case?

Yes, under Michigan law, a hospital can be held responsible for the negligent acts of its doctors, nurses, and other staff members. In addition, the hospital may be held liable even if the negligent doctor is not a hospital employee.

What is the Law for Holding Hospitals Responsible for Medical Malpractice?

Michigan hospitals can be held responsible for the acts of non-employee doctors under the ostensible-agency doctrine or apparent agency. Under this theory, if a hospital acts in a way that leads patients to believe a doctor is their agent, and the patient relies on that appearance to their detriment, the hospital can be held legally responsible for the agent’s (doctor's) actions.

Under Grewe v. Mt. Clemens General Hospital, 404 Mich 240 (1978), a hospital can be liable for the acts of a non-employee doctor if the patient reasonably believed the doctor was the hospital’s agent. That belief must arise from the act or neglect of the hospital, not from the patient’s assumptions.

The critical question is whether the patient sought treatment at the hospital or viewed it merely as a facility for their own physician’s care.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently clarified this issue. In Markel v. Beaumont Hospital, the Court held there was enough evidence to show a jury that Beaumont could be held liable for the negligent act performed by a non-Beaumont employee. It is a significant ruling in medical malpractice cases.

Markel v. Beaumont Hospital, _ Mich _ (2025)

In this case, Ms. Markel underwent surgery at Beaumont Hospital, now Corewell Health. She returned a week later to the emergency room with low back pain radiating down her legs. While in the hospital, Dr. Linet Lonappan, an internist employed by Hospital Consultants, PC (not Beaumont Hospital), treated Ms. Markel. The Plaintiff claims Dr. Lonappan overlooked a key test result indicating that she had Group B Streptococcus. The Plaintiff was not advised of this result, and the infection went untreated. She returned to the defendant's emergency room a few days later, where she received treatment for the infection.

Ms. Markel subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging that Dr. Lonappan committed medical malpractice by failing to inform her of the test result or treat the infection. She further alleged that Beaumont Hospital was liable for Dr. Lonappan's negligence under the ostensible-agency doctrine.

The Court of Appeals dismissed the Plaintiff’s case, holding that Ms. Markel must prove she relied on any representation that Dr. Lonappan was Beaumont’s agent. Because she did not, she couldn’t hold the hospital liable. The Supreme Court reversed, finding that Markel presented sufficient evidence to create a factual issue as to whether Beaumont could be held liable under the doctrine of ostensible agency.

Hospitals Can Be Held Responsible for Acts of Non-Employee Doctors

The Supreme Court in the Markel decision also held that Beaumont did nothing to dispel Ms. Markel’s reasonable belief that Dr. Lonappan was the hospital’s agent. In other words, even though the patient had no prior relationship with the doctor, reliance can be inferred when a patient presents to the emergency room and is treated by a physician at the hospital. No explicit proof of reliance is needed unless the hospital informs the patient otherwise.

What Does the Markel Case Mean for Future Medical Malpractice Cases?

The impact of the Markel case will be far-reaching. It means hospitals can now be held liable for the malpractice of a non-employee doctor, unless they clearly inform patients that the doctor is not their agent. This will broaden hospital liability.

In future medical malpractice cases, plaintiffs will not have to show specific acts of reliance. Instead, simply going to the hospital ER and being assigned a doctor is enough. This should improve patient care, as patients can now reasonably assume the hospital is responsible for those who treat them within their buildings.

What Will Hospitals Have To Do To Get Out of Medical Malpractice Cases?

Hospitals will have to take very proactive steps. It will involve communicating with patients when a doctor is not their agent. These steps will include clearly marked disclaimers or consent forms that patients must review and sign. Still, even these forms may not be enough for hospitals to escape liability.

Michigan Medical Malpractice Lawyers Fighting For You

The medical malpractice lawyers at the Lee Steinberg Law Firm have been aggressively fighting for Michigan residents for over 50 years. We handle all types of medical malpractice cases, including:

Our team of medical negligence lawyers always goes the extra step for our clients and their families. We take on hospitals and their insurance companies head-on and fight back. Malpractice cases are complex. They require the involvement of multiple experts to explain what can be a complex situation. Let us make it simple so we can obtain the maximum compensation possible.

Contact the Lee Steinberg Law Firm today for a free consultation. We never charge anything until we win your case. Our Michigan medical malpractice lawyers are available to answer your questions. Click on a free case evaluation form or call us at 1-866-511-0594 today.

Michigan Medical Malpractice Lawyers and Hospital Liability