Click on any headline for full story…

Attorney Matthew S. LaBeau represented a snow-removal company in a Macomb County slip-and-fall case. He argued that the court should dismiss the plaintiff’s claims because the snow-removal company didn’t owe the plaintiff a legal duty in the first place. This argument drew on a body of Michigan law holding that a plaintiff seeking damages for negligence must establish that the defendant owed a duty independent of its contractual obligations. Here, the Macomb County Circuit Court agreed with LaBeau’s argument that the snow-removal company didn’t owe the plaintiff a separate duty. It therefore entered a judgment in favor of the snow-removal company, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims for significant damages.

Collins Einhorn Farrell PC is pleased to announce that attorney Lindsey A. Peck has joined the firm’s Appellate Practice Group. Ms. Peck will be focusing her practice on appellate litigation, dispositive motion practice, and post-verdict litigation in the trial courts.

In Hagy v Demers & Adams, Case No. 17-3696 (February 16, 2018), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff with an otherwise valid claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act did not satisfy the “case and controversy” requirement under Article III of the federal constitution.

An attorney representing the creditor in Hagy sent a letter to the debtor’s attorney stating that the debtor didn’t owe anything else to the creditor. The letter didn’t include disclosures required under the FDCPA. So the debtor filed a lawsuit under the FDCPA and its Ohio-law analogue. The trial court declined to dismiss the debtor’s lawsuit, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. To read the full client alert, click on the headline.

Plaintiff brought suit in federal court alleging $9 million in damages due to an alleged product defect. Attorneys David C. Anderson, Trent B. Collier and Eric M. Kociba defended the case, obtained summary judgment in their client’s favor, and persuaded the Court to dismiss the case. The Court’s 18-page opinion may be found at

Attorneys Colleen H. Burke and Karen R. Geibel were recently appointed to fill vacancies in the State Bar of Michigan Representative Assembly, both representing the 6th Judicial Circuit. With 150 members that represent the entire state’s judicial districts, the Representative Assembly is the final policy-making body of the State Bar of Michigan. The appointment of both Ms. Burke and Ms. Geibel will be effective at the April 21, 2018 meeting of the Representative Assembly. They will run for re-election this spring to hold the seat for the duration of their terms, which expire 9/30/2020 and 9/30/2019 respectively. For full details, click on the headline.

Attorney Elizabeth A. Hohauser successfully argued motion for summary disposition on behalf of no-fault insurer due to Plaintiff’s fraudulent representations in claimed benefits. Plaintiff’s medical records and surveillance were successfully used to directly and specifically contradict Plaintiff’s testimony and submissions for replacement services, attendant care, wage loss, and medical bills, resulting in a Wayne County Circuit Court Judge granting motion for summary disposition and the dismissal of Plaintiff’s entire claim with prejudice.

We are pleased to announce that our partner Deborah A. Lujan has been named a 2018 Leader in the Law by Michigan Lawyers Weekly. Ms. Lujan, selected for her dedication, leadership, and going above and beyond the call in support of her clients and her firm, is one of 30 distinguished lawyers who were chosen to receive this prestigious award. The state’s largest legal newspaper says that this year’s honorees “are changing the law, expanding access to justice and improving the profession and their communities. They are the lawyers in Michigan setting the example for other lawyers.” For full details, please click on the headline.

Collins Einhorn attorneys Theresa M. Asoklis and Michael J. Cook successfully defended a complex, large damage, legal-malpractice case. After the trial court denied two motions for summary disposition, Asoklis and Cook, obtained a rare grant of leave to appeal from the Court of Appeals. The appellate court then reversed, finding that the trial court should have granted summary disposition to the defendants based on the expiration of the statute of limitations. To read further, click on the headline.

Collins Einhorn Farrell PC is pleased to announce that attorney Sam S. Mate, Jr. has joined the firm’s Automotive Liability practice group. Mr. Mate’s practice focuses on first- and third-party litigation matters and no-fault claims. He brings to the firm a strong background in defending first- and third-party automobile liability claims from start to finish. Click on the headline for full details.

Working on behalf of a no-fault insurer, attorney Scott J. Pawlak obtained summary disposition of Plaintiff’s claims in Oakland County Circuit Court due to Plaintiff’ fraudulent representations in his claim for benefits. By obtaining testimony from Plaintiff and his services provider that “directly and specifically contradicted” the representations made in Plaintiff’s replacement service statements, Attorney Pawlak was able to persuade the Court that the Plaintiff had committed fraud under the policy, without having to rely on surveillance evidence. The Plaintiff’s and his provider’s claims were dismissed with prejudice.