Michigan Radiology and Medical Imaging Error Lawyer

A scan is often the moment a patient’s future gets decided. The chest X-ray that catches the nodule while it is still small. The emergency CT that finds the bleed tonight instead of tomorrow. The mammogram read carefully instead of quickly. When the reading is wrong, or the right reading never reaches the right doctor, patients usually learn about it months or years later, after the damage is done.

Vahdat Weisman Law represents Michigan patients and families harmed by radiology and imaging errors. If a scan was misread, overlooked, or never followed up, call (734) 469-4994 for a free, confidential consultation, any hour of the day. You pay no attorney fee unless we recover compensation for you.

How Often Are Scans Misread?

Radiology’s own researchers have studied this question for decades. A widely cited review in the peer-reviewed journal Insights into Imaging puts the error rate in day-to-day radiology practice at roughly 3 to 5 percent of studies, and reports that when scans are re-read later, reviewers flag discrepancies at much higher rates, around 30 percent in some retrospective studies. Those two numbers measure different things under different conditions, but the honest takeaway is simple: misreads are not rare events, and the profession knows it.

An error rate is not a negligence rate. Some findings are subtle enough that a careful radiologist can reasonably miss them, and hindsight makes everything look obvious. A malpractice case requires proof of the standard of care, a breach, and that the breach more probably than not caused harm, and that comes from qualified experts reviewing the same images with the same clinical information the original reader had.

How Imaging Goes Wrong

Most imaging cases we review fall into a few recurring patterns, though not every case fits neatly into one.

The finding was missed. Radiologists call these perception errors, and they are the most common type. The nodule was on the chest film, the fracture line was visible, the mass was on the mammogram, but it was not seen. One documented trap is “satisfaction of search”: the reader finds one abnormality and stops looking, missing the second, more dangerous one.

The finding was seen but misinterpreted. The abnormality appears in the report but is called benign when it was malignant, old when it was new, or insignificant when it demanded action.

The finding was reported but never acted on. The suspicious nodule is right there in the written report, and nobody told the patient. The report was filed, the ordering doctor moved on, and the disease progressed. The American College of Radiology’s practice parameter on communicating findings recognizes that certain urgent or unexpected findings warrant direct, timely communication to the treating team rather than routine report distribution, and depending on the finding, that duty can reach the radiologist as well as the ordering physician and the hospital’s result-tracking systems. These cases are as much about broken communication loops as about any one doctor.

The wrong study, or no study at all. Sometimes the failure belongs to the ordering physician rather than the radiologist: the wrong test was ordered, imaging was skipped when symptoms demanded it, or a radiologist’s own recommendation for follow-up imaging was ignored.

The Errors That Do the Most Damage

Missed or misread cancer findings lead the list: lung nodules on chest X-rays and CTs, breast cancer on mammograms, and incidental masses that nobody tracked. A delayed diagnosis can change the stage at which treatment begins, and our cancer misdiagnosis page explains how Michigan law measures that lost time. For mammograms specifically, federal law under the Mammography Quality Standards Act requires facilities to send patients written results, within days for suspicious findings, which makes a silent mammogram failure especially inexcusable.

Missed brain bleeds and strokes on emergency CT scans, where hours decide outcomes, as detailed on our stroke misdiagnosis page. Missed fractures, especially in the spine, hip, and scaphoid bone of the wrist, where delay can mean paralysis, collapse of the bone, or permanent loss of function. Missed pulmonary embolisms and aortic emergencies on CT angiograms, which can kill within hours. And misread emergency imaging generally, where preliminary night reads, teleradiology arrangements, and morning over-reads create windows for a dangerous discrepancy to reach a patient who has already been discharged. Those cases overlap with our emergency room negligence practice.

Who Is Responsible for an Imaging Error?

Often more people than the radiologist are responsible, and identifying every responsible party early matters because Michigan’s pre-suit rules require notice to each defendant.

Many hospital radiologists are independent contractors or work for separate radiology groups, but Michigan law can hold the hospital responsible under ostensible agency when the patient reasonably looked to the hospital for care rather than choosing the radiologist personally, a fact-specific doctrine that matters most in emergency settings. Teleradiology companies add another corporate layer, often out of state, with contracts that define who was responsible for final reads and discrepancy notification. The ordering physician may share responsibility for failing to read the report, act on it, or tell the patient. The hospital or health system can be directly responsible for result-communication systems that let critical findings fall through the cracks.

Under the Michigan Supreme Court’s 2024 Stokes decision, standard-of-care experts must match each defendant’s board specialty, and MCL 600.2169 adds strict practice-time requirements. A single imaging case may need a diagnostic radiologist for the reading and an expert in the ordering physician’s specialty for the follow-up failure. Getting that lineup right at the start decides whether a case survives.

Proving the Case

An imaging case begins with the pictures themselves, in the original diagnostic format, not screenshots or portal copies. We obtain the full studies, the radiologist’s report and any addenda, the ordering records, the clinical history the radiologist was actually given, and the communication trail showing who was told what and when. PACS audit trails, where preserved, can show who opened a study, when, and whether prior scans were pulled up for comparison. Independent experts then evaluate what a competent radiologist should have identified prospectively, with the information available at the time, not with hindsight.

Causation is the second battleground, because the defense in nearly every delayed-diagnosis case argues the outcome would have been the same. Michigan law splits these fights into two frameworks. Where the harm actually occurred, and the evidence shows the delay more probably than not caused or worsened it, the claim proceeds as traditional malpractice. Where the theory is instead a lost opportunity for a better outcome, MCL 600.2912a requires showing the lost opportunity exceeded 50 percent. Which framework applies depends on the medicine and how the claim is built, and in cancer cases the real fight is usually between oncologists over what earlier detection would have changed. We build that analysis with specialists who can quantify it.

Michigan’s Deadlines and Pre-Suit Requirements

Imaging cases carry a built-in trap: patients often have no idea a scan was misread until years later, when the cancer is found, or the injury declares itself. Michigan generally allows two years from the negligent act to file under MCL 600.5805, or six months from when you discovered or reasonably should have discovered the claim, whichever is later, under MCL 600.5838a. The discovery date is an objective, fact-specific question; the burden of proving it is on the patient, and a six-year outer limit applies with only narrow exceptions. In practice, the moment anyone tells you an older scan showed something, the safest assumption is that your clock is already running.

Before suit, a notice of intent must be served on each defendant, generally 182 days ahead, under MCL 600.2912b, and the complaint must be supported by an affidavit of merit from a qualified expert under MCL 600.2912d. Assembling the imaging, the experts, and the affidavit takes months, which makes the practical deadline much shorter than the statutory one. Imaging archives, audit data, and teleradiology contracts are evidence we move quickly to preserve.

What Compensation Can You Recover?

• Economic damages, uncapped: the additional surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation a delay made necessary, future medical and attendant care, lost wages, and lost earning capacity, proven through medical, vocational, and economic experts.
• Non-economic damages, capped for malpractice claims under MCL 600.1483: pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life. For 2026, the cap is $596,400 in most cases and $1,065,000 only for the specific injury categories the statute defines, per the Michigan Department of Treasury, with annual adjustments and a single aggregate cap per claim.

Imaging errors can lead to devastating consequences when providers fail to identify or communicate critical findings. Our medical malpractice attorneys represent patients and families across Michigan in these complex cases, holding negligent healthcare providers accountable for the harm they cause.

What Should You Do Now?

Request everything, in writing: the imaging studies themselves on disk or through the patient portal, every written report, and the ordering physician’s records. Do not settle for summaries. If a doctor told you something “was there on the old scan,” write down who said it, when, and exactly what they said, because that conversation matters to the discovery analysis. Keep treating, keep appointments, and speak with a lawyer before giving any statement to a hospital or insurer.

Why Choose Vahdat Weisman Law?

We obtain the full studies, not just reports. We retain board-matched experts who satisfy Michigan’s strict qualification rules. We prepare every case for trial from the first day. And we are honest in both directions: if independent experts tell us the miss was one a careful radiologist could reasonably have made, we will tell you that plainly and at no cost, because false hope helps no one.

Founding partners Kara E. Weisman and Jordan S. Vahdat have each been honored as Super Lawyers Rising Stars, and our attorneys are members of the State Bar of Michigan and active in the Michigan Association for Justice. We advance case costs, represent patients across Michigan from our Livonia office, and have Spanish-speaking staff, with phones answered 24/7.

Frequently Asked Questions

• A later scan found cancer, and my doctor says it was visible on an older scan. Do I have a case? Possibly. The questions are whether a competent radiologist should have identified it at the time, and what the delay changed about your treatment and prognosis. Both require expert review of the actual images, and the discovery-rule deadlines reward fast action, so have the older scan reviewed as soon as possible.
• The radiologist’s report mentioned the problem, but nobody ever told me. Is that malpractice? It may be. A correct report that never reaches the patient helps no one. The ordering physician’s follow-up, the radiologist’s communication of urgent findings, and the hospital’s result-tracking systems can all be examined, and the paper trail usually shows where the loop broke.
• The scan was read overnight by an out-of-state teleradiology service. Does that complicate things? It adds defendants and contracts, not a dead end. Care delivered to a patient in a Michigan hospital is generally litigated in Michigan, and the teleradiology contracts themselves often clarify who was responsible for the reading and for flagging discrepancies.
• How long do I have to file a radiology error claim in Michigan? Generally two years from the misread, or six months from discovery in limited situations, with a six-year outer limit. Because misreads often surface late, the discovery analysis is technical and fact-specific. Bring us the timeline, and we will map your deadlines at no charge.
• What does it cost to find out if the scan was misread? The consultation is free, and we advance the case costs, including expert review when warranted. You pay a fee only if we recover compensation for you.

Talk to a Michigan Radiology Error Lawyer Today

If a misread or ignored scan cost you time, health, or someone you love, the original images and records can still show what should have happened. Call Vahdat Weisman Law at (734) 469-4994 or contact us online for a free, confidential consultation. Available 24/7, serving all of Michigan.

Dedicated to Justice. Devoted to You. Winning for Your Future.

This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique, and prior results do not guarantee future success.