This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Niec (D) operated a beauty shop. Doutre (P) suffered head and facial injuries because of a bleach and color treatment given by D without a pretreatment patch test. At trial, D was not permitted to testify about the standard of care observed by beauty shops in the Flint area. P was awarded $10,000. D's motion for a new trial was granted, but the new trial was limited to the question of liability. P appealed; the trial court's evidentiary ruling was correct. D appealed; it was error to limit the new trial to the issue of liability.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.