Collins Einhorn founding member and current president of the State Bar of Michigan Brian D. Einhorn devotes this month’s President’s Page to the subject of judicial reform in Michigan. The full article is available through the Michigan Bar Journal.
Collins Einhorn founding member and current president of the State Bar of Michigan Brian D. Einhorn devotes this month’s President’s Page to the subject of judicial reform in Michigan. The full article is available through the Michigan Bar Journal.
We were delighted to celebrate the holiday season at the Women’s Bar Association’s 31st Annual Holiday Party and charity auction on December 12, 2013. The Detroit Legal News recently posted this article on the WBA’s holiday party, along with a picture including Collins Einhorn attorneys Melissa Graves and Tonya E. Juarez-Lundberg. Melissa is currently the…
When it comes to premises liability, Michigan parking lot owners are often well-protected by case law. In Isaac v. Standard Parking Corporation (December 12, 2013)¸ the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed the liability of those who are hired to manage those lots. On December 12, 2003, the Isaacs were flying out of Bishop International Airport…
In United States v Llanez-Garcia,a federal public defender made an honest mistake. That mistake snowballed into not one but two reprimands from the district court. But the Sixth Circuit recognized the high stakes that disciplinary matters raise for attorneys: “An attorney’s reputation is her most valuable possession. It forms the basis for her peers’ view…
The admission of expert testimony in Michigan is rarely a straightforward matter—yet it can make or break a plaintiff’s case. It is critical, therefore, for litigators to remain up-to-date on Michigan appellate courts’ jurisprudence in this area. Clerc v Chippewa County War Memorial Hospital is the latest entry in this field. In Clerc, the defendants…
A change to Rule 28 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure aims to make appellate briefs shorter and less redundant. Rule 28 currently requires a “statement of the case” and a separate “statement setting out the facts.” These requirements often seemed arbitrary and frequently resulted in briefs that needlessly restated facts—once in the “statement…
In Stein v Home-Owners Insurance Company(October 17, 2013), the Michigan Court of Appeals held that, when an insurance policy contains a clause voiding coverage in the event of fraud by the insured, the insurer need only meet the “preponderance of the evidence” standard rather than “clear and convincing evidence.” The plaintiff in Stein owned a…
By Julie E. Nichols (originally published in Claims Journal) An adjuster’s deposition, if relevant, can provide the backbone of a strong defense, assuming defense counsel and the adjuster can avoid some deposition traps. A few of the common pitfalls to avoid are described below: Pitfall #1: Is The Adjuster’s Deposition Relevant or Necessary? The first…
On December 1, 2013, federal courts will be operating under an amended Rule 45, which governs subpoenas. These changes are particularly important to attorneys who have to subpoena out-of-state or distant witnesses. Under the amended rule: A subpoena is issued from the court in which a case is pending. Previously, Rule 45 provided that a…
In Null v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company, the Court of Appeals concluded that an insurer properly denied coverage based on the insured’s violation of a residence requirement, even though evidence suggested that the insurer knew the named insured had changed his address. The plaintiff and her late husband were buying a home from the plaintiff’s brother-in-law,…