MIbLAWg: Michigan Supreme Court Commentary

Justice Weaver Takes Engler 4 To Task

Justice Weaver is a conservative Republican Justice of our Michigan Supreme Court.  But even Justice Weaver appears to have had enough activism from her neo-conservative co-Justices which are commonly referred to as the Engler 4: Justice Maura D. Corrigan, Justice Robert P. Young, Jr. (elected during Engler reign as Michigan Governor), Justice Stephen J. Markman (appointed by Engler), Chief Justice Clifford W. Taylor (appointed by Engler).

Justice Weaver acknowledged that she disagreed with prior law.  However, she also acknowledged her sworn duty to apply that law.  Here is what Justice Weaver thoughtfully wrote in a recent decision Devillers v. Auto Owners Insurance Company, 473 Mich. 562 (2005) where the Supreme Court considered itself immune from having to honor established legal precedent:

First, the Lewis decision does not defy "practical workability"; it has been applied for
nineteen years without causing any fundamental problems with no--fault insurance. Second, the Lewis decision has indeed become "so embedded, so fundamental, to everyones expectations that to change it would produce not just readjustments, but practical real--world dislocations." Robinson, supra at 466. Claimants who consulted an attorney on whether they needed to file suit after receiving no response to a filed claim would have been told, on the basis of Lewis, that filing the claim had preserved their rights until they received an answer from the insurance company. Changing that rule now will affect an unknown number of claimants who will lose their rights to benefits that had previously been protected. Third, there have been no changes in the law or facts since Lewis was issued. Finally, Lewis did not misread or misconstrue a statute; instead, it applied judicial tolling to the statute as an equitable matter.

In light of the doctrine of stare decisis and the purposes it serves, neither the defendant nor the majority have given sufficient reason to overrule Lewis. Correction for correction's sake does not make sense. The case has not been made why the Court should not adhere to the doctrine of stare decisis in this case.

The Michigan Supreme Court has destabilized the judicial system in Michigan to such an extent that it is virtually impossible for Michigan citizens to know what the law is or understand their rights.  Lawyers can not advise their clients because legal precedent which is the foundation of our legal system has become meaningless and become replaced by the political agenda of the court.  Because our Michigan Supreme Court majority refuses to honor precedent, it is impossible to say what the law will be one week or one year from now. 

At best, Michigan attorneys are forced to guess which cases the Supreme Court will decide to accept for review.  Attorneys across the State of Michigan already are forced to advise clients that  "If you are not a major corporation or insurance company, and your case goes up to the Michigan Supreme Court, you will likely lose, irrespective of established precedent or the facts." 

Michigan citizens need to realize that they are being stripped of their legal rights by the present court majority, irregardless of which political party you belong to.  It is my Republican clients that are always most shocked when they learn what has happened to our Michigan justice system. Even they understand the need for precedent in order for the legal system to properly function.

Why Blog About The Michigan Supreme Court?

The Internet offers a unique opportunity for change. Our First Amendment rights have never been so important than they are now, when you do not need to own a newspaper or a TV station to express your views to the entire world!

Click on the pod cast link below to learn what this blog is all about and why you should participate in the discussion...

Hypocrisy On The High Court

Here is what one attorney has posted about Michigan Supreme Court Justice's Markman's view of his judicial role:

In a speech delivered April 29, 2003 at Hillsdale College, Justice Stephen Markman of the Michigan Supreme Court discussed a number of misconceptions about the Constitution of the United States. One of those misconceptions was that the role of a judge in interpreting a constitution is to do justice. As Justice Markman points out, the role of a judge is to do justice under law. Justice Markman states: “The responsible judge must subordinate his personal sense of justice to the public justice of our Constitution and its representative and legal institutions.” He quotes Justice Felix Frankfurter to the effect that: “The highest example of judicial duty is to subordinate one’s personal will and one’s private views to the law.”  more.

Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y?  Wikipedia offer this definition:

Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practise. The word derives from the late Latin hypocrisis and Greek hupokrisis both meaning play-acting or pretence. The word is arguably derived from hypo- meaning small, + krinein meaning to decide/to dispute. A classic example of a hypocritical act is to denounce another for carrying out some action whilst carrying out the same action oneself.

Supreme Court Justice Stephen J. Markman Invites Debate

Judicial Activism Debate:  Here is what Justice Markman has to say about the controversy concerning assertions of the court's judicial activism, assertions which have swirled around the Michigan Supreme Court since Engler stacked the bench with judges who are more interested in making law than following it. 

"What is reflected in these cases is a continuing jurisprudential debate concerning the role of the judicial branch and the meaning of the “judicial power,” concerning the relationship between the courts and other branches of government, concerning how the language of the law is to be interpreted and given meaning, concerning the impact of precedent, and concerning how the law can best be maintained as a stable and predictable body. Obviously, these are matters about which a consensus cannot always be found on this Court. Yet there is a consensus that these are matters worthy of reflection and analysis and debate, and that is what you have. And it is a debate, in my judgment, that has been carried out in a robust, but also a civil, fashion." more ...

Do we need any more of an invitation to take this debate from the judicial halls to the street, right to the citizens of Michigan?

Michigan Supreme Court Strikes Again

The Engler-stacked Michigan supreme court has launched an all out attack on the Michigan judiciary and Michigan citizens these last few years.  They openly state that they do not need to follow prior precedent.  They only rule in favor of insurance companies, regardless of the facts.  They have destabilized the judicial system in our great state to the point where it is considered by many to be a joke.  They are described readily as radical and dangerous.

No citizen can receive any reliable legal advice because the Engler justices continually change the law to their own political preference, and either ignore or overrule decades of established law.

Is it time to create a new justice system for the great people of Michigan so that they have a chance at the justice they deserve?  Judge Judy would be a better alterative than the joke of judiciary we now offer them.

Justice Denied: The Engler Legacy

Here is an opinion piece from the Metro Times on the Englery legacy in Michigan.  You can read the whole piece by clicking here.
_____________________

Green to obscene

Michigan once was among the most environmentally progressive states in the nation. Engler changed that with his crimes against nature, from unleashing the oil and gas industry to polluter protection laws he engineered. Like his cohort currently occupying the White House, a lot of people "misunderestimated" Engler when he first took office, deceived by his comically rotund silhouette and wooden speaking style. But the choke's been on us ever since.

Bad to worse

When Engler took office the state was $1 billion in the hole. But our porky pal has left Michigan in worse fiscal shape than when he took office, due largely to the major tax cuts enacted under his administration — more than 20 in all. Skeptics warned that the soaring economy of the ’90s wouldn't last, and that someday we'd pay a price for all those reductions. As fate would have it, the bill is coming due as Engler exits, leaving a $1.5 billion barrel of red ink for his Democratic successor to deal with.

Down and out

Hell-bent on being a national leader in welfare reform, Engler eliminated General Assistance, cutting off aid to 83,000 single adults. He also saved a mint by dramatically reducing assistance to women with children. In protest, hundreds of makeshift homes went up on the capital grounds in Lansing. But the demonstration was as effective as the "Recall Engler" initiative also sparked by the cuts. You can’t blame folks for trying.

Kicked to the curb

The King Pigman allegedly saved the state millions by closing hospitals for the mentally ill. Sure, some folks had to be dragged — literally — out Detroit’s now-closed Lafayette Clinic. But he accomplished his mission and placed these vulnerable souls in private homes that are poorly regulated. Many mentally ill people wound up in the streets, jails and emergency rooms. Lucky for Engler these costs are not easily calculated. If they were, his plan would likely prove to be a fiscal failure and social disaster.

Justice denied

Though rid of Engler, we are stuck with the ultraconservative jurists he appointed. They are sure to continue his pro-business, anti-plaintiff agenda for years to come. The most blatant example of the state Supreme Court’s hostility toward those who sue was when his appointees suggested that sexually harassing comments made at work may be protected by the First Amendment. Never mind that there is no case law in the country to support this theory. Nor did the attorney representing the alleged sexual harasser raise the issue. Now, the judges are twiddling their thumbs to figure out a way to justify their lunacy. No doubt they will.

Worker's stomp

The conservative-packed courts also has wreaked havoc on injured workers.

"Engler's judicial appointments have provided a constant attack on injured workers," says workers comp lawyer Ron Glotta. Although the appointees claim to oppose judicial activism, their actions have been just the opposite, overturning legal precedents at an unprecedented rate.

"These people aren't conservatives," says Glotta. "They're radical reactionaries who have been relentless in their efforts to take away benefits from injured workers. The attack has been incessant and unforgiving."

Tort deform

When Big John first sought the governor's office, the insurance industry was there to support him in a major way. It was an investment that paid off big in the years since, with Engler engineering major changes in the laws governing the civil suits filed on behalf of people killed or maimed by faulty products, bungling doctors and the like. Alan Helmkamp, president of the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association, puts it this way: "Most people have no idea the many changes Engler's made that have benefited corporate Michigan and the insurance carriers of this state."

Again, Engler’s judges have been there to pick up any remaining slack.

"People come to me who have been injured, or who have a family member who has been killed, and I have to give them what I call "the speech," telling them they no longer have any civil remedy in this state," says Helmkamp.

Which is why Engler’s exit should evoke cheers from the maimed and broken, the widows and orphans.

Dissin’ Detroit

Like a good Republican, Engler preaches local rule, but doesn’t walk the talk. The state takeover of the Detroit Public Schools is proof of that. Engler dismissed the elected school board and replaced them with appointees. What’s maddening is that throughout Engler’s reign he ignored Detroit, probably wishing that it would implode. He sure helped shift political power from the southeast to the west. So why the interest in Detroit’s failing school system? Some suspect that he used the school system to beef up his lousy education record in an attempt to get an appointment from Dubya Bush. We see where that got him. No job and more ill will among Detroiters. — Metro Times staff

Send comments to [email protected].

Law Firms Chip In to Get Happier Jurors

From Law.com:

When the National Center for State Courts wants to get something done -- like launching a program aimed at increasing juror participation -- it sometimes relies on the kindness of lawyers. The center has raised about a quarter of a million dollars, mostly from law firms, to jump-start the National Jury Program. Its vision: a court system where, as one attorney from a contributing firm put it, "jurors don't dread jury service like they're going to the dentist."

Leonard Post
The National Law Journal
01-07-2005
When The National Center for State Courts wants to get something done -- like launching a program aimed at increasing jury participation -- sometimes it relies on the kindness of lawyers.

About a quarter of a million dollars of kindness. That was the amount raised mostly from law firms that recently jump-started the National Jury Program, a project of the National Center for State Courts' Center for Jury Studies.

The center expects to provide technical assistance to states to improve the conditions under which jurors work. That means helping states to combine 21st century technology with elemental aids and old-fashioned respect to make jury service more attractive, say center officials.

Read the article

Even The Jurors Won't Show For Duty

Fla. Supreme Court: Everyone Into the Pool
State's high court wants to know why residents are no-shows when summoned for possible jury duty

Dan Christensen
Miami Daily Business Review
01-03-2005

Complaints by litigants and lawyers about the increasing difficulty of impaneling enough jurors to address complex criminal and civil cases have led Florida's top court to ask the public how to improve the state's jury system.

Besides examining juror shortages and trial scheduling problems, the high court wants to hear about the experiences of jurors themselves.

"We want to see if there's something we can do to improve the conditions of jury service," Florida Supreme Court Justice R. Fred Lewis said in an interview last month.

On Jan. 19, Lewis will be at the Hyatt Regency in Miami to attend an unprecedented public hearing seeking input from lawyers and others about their experiences with the state's jury system. The hearing, to run from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., is sponsored by the state Supreme Court's work group on standards for jury pool size. It will be held in conjunction with the Florida Bar's mid-year meeting.

Florida's performance at mustering jurors is dismal. Nationally, 40 percent of those summoned for jury duty show up at the courthouse. But only 30 percent answer the call in Florida, according to information from the state court administrator's office.
More ...

Michigan's Radical Supreme Court

The Michigan Supreme Court has been  labeled many things in the last few years.  Many call it the 'Engler Court'  (in reference to the ex-Governor John Engler who many assert packed the courts with political cronies with little judicial experience) .   However, the latest round of bad decisions from the Michigan Supreme Court was so unprecedented (pardon the pun) that even the staid Associated Press finally admitted that our highest court has earned a ‘radical reputation.'  The court itself has been under attack for being political and result oriented.

Regardless of your political posture, such a reputation does tremendous harm to the Michigan judiciary and public confidence in our justice system.  The judiciary is supposed to be independent and 'non-political.'  This third branch of government is the check and balance on the two other political branches.  When our courts become politicized, every Michigan citizen stands to lose.

Here are some links of interest:

• MTLA President Michael Pitt's Column
• Justice at any price?
• Michigan Supreme Court: The Impact Will Be Felt for a Decade
• Fieger to file complaint against four Supreme Court justices
• Trial attorney takes issue with critics on Supreme Court
• Complaint against four state Supreme Court justices
• Trial Lawyers Target Three Michigan Judges Up for Election
• Restore Balance and Fairness to the Michigan Supreme
• Michigan Supreme Court Targets Women
• Justice Nobody
• Justice Markman Ad- Extremist

   

Rational Thought As The Basis Of Law

Here is a great quote from Steve Sanders, UofM law blogger from his blog "Reason & Liberty"
..........
Reason - meaning accurate perception and logical argument, based on fact rather than prejudice or superstition - is critical to the survival of liberty. Reason is the essence of law; it depends on an enlightened citizenry and a free press ... Civil liberties, human autonomy, and the countermajoritarian principles of our Constitution are in peril when fundamental rights are subject to the whims of popular opinion, and when dogma supplants free thought and debate.
.......