Columns

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced the appointment of Nicole Huddleston to the Oakland County Probate Court.

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced the appointment of Nicole Huddleston to the Oakland County Probate Court.

Huddleston is the owner of Huddleston Law PLLC, a firm specializing in probate, family, and civil law. Huddleston previously served as managing director at the Detroit Justice Center and as a staff attorney at Detroit Justice Center, Lakeshore Legal Aid, and Legal Aid and Defender. 

Huddleston is a member of the Tri-Community Coalition, Youth Connections, and the D. Augustus Straker Bar Association. She is also a member of the Executive Board of 
Matrix Theater and often serves as a volunteer attorney at expungement fairs. 

Huddleston earned a Bachelor of Arts in communications from Oakland University and a law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.  

“I am sincerely honored and humbled by this appointment from Governor Whitmer, and I am grateful to her and her team for their thoughtful consideration throughout this process,” said Huddleston. “It is a privilege to serve the people of Oakland County and this great state. I remain committed to advancing a justice system grounded in fairness, integrity, and efficiency, and I will work hard every day to uphold the trust that has been placed in me. Thank you again, Governor Whitmer, for this tremendous honor.”

This appointment was made to fill a partial term following the resignation of Judge Kathleen Ryan. Huddleston’s term will commence on April 17, 2026, and expire at twelve o’clock noon on January 1, 2027.    

•            •            •

Michigan Assistant Attorney General Stephanie B. White was recently recognized by Michigan Lawyers Weekly as one of its 2026 Up and Coming Lawyers.

White joined the Michigan Department of Attorney General in 2022 and currently serves the Children and Youth Services Division where she represents the Department of Health and Human Services. Prior to becoming an assistant attorney general, she served as a Lawyer Guardian Ad Litem with Juvenile Law Group where she represented children in child welfare and delinquency proceedings. In this role, she advocated for the best interests of minors navigating complex legal systems. White was also previously an attorney at A Call to Care Law Firm where she handled a broad range of matters, including child welfare, family law, and criminal law.

White earned her Bachelor of Science in Sociology with a concentration in criminal justice, double minor in child development and psychology from Central Michigan University in 2014. White received her law degree from Michigan State University College of Law in 2017.

White is active in civic and cultural organizations, including the Children’s Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, the Department of Attorney General Social Committee, the Black Women’s Lawyers Association of Michigan, and the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan.

•            •            •

Goodman Acker announced the opening of a new office in Livonia.  Located at 17370 North Laurel Park Drive, the new office provides a dedicated, professional setting for client meetings, depositions and case-related discussions, expanding Goodman Acker’s footprint in western Wayne County and increasing accessibility for Metro Detroit clients.

“This expansion reflects both our growth as a firm and our desire to be present in the communities we serve,” said Jordan Acker, partner at Goodman Acker. “Livonia is home to families, workers and businesses who deserve trusted personal injury representation. Having a physical presence here allows us to better support clients during some of the most difficult moments of their lives.”

•            •            •

Miller Johnson is pleased to welcome Jennifer Hetu to the Intellectual Property Practice Group. Hetu joins the firm’s growing Detroit office.

Hetu concentrates her practice on trademark law and brand protection. She advises clients on the availability, use, and registration of trademarks in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, and provides strategic guidance on global trademark filing and portfolio management. Hetu manages all aspects of U.S. and international trademark prosecution and represents clients before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Her practice also includes trademark enforcement matters, including cease and desist actions, domain name disputes, settlement negotiations, and opposition proceedings in the United States and abroad.

Prior to joining Miller Johnson, Hetu served as a trademark examining attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and was previously a partner in the intellectual property practice group of a large Michigan-based business law firm.

“I’m thrilled to join Miller Johnson and become part of such a respected and innovative firm,” said Hetu. “I look forward to working alongside this talented group of attorneys to continue building a market-leading practice and delivering outstanding results for our clients.”

Hetu earned a law degree from Cooley Law School and a B.A. from Western Michigan University.

•            •            •

McDonald Hopkins is proud to announce that attorney Stephen Gross has been recognized as a member of the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Bankruptcy & Restructuring Lawyers. 

Gross is a member in the firm’s Strategic Advisory and Business Restructuring Department and chair of the Automotive Practice Group. He addresses complex business issues, including creative strategic solutions to liquidity, pricing, and other issues requiring contract renegotiation, restructuring, acquisitions, or divestitures. 

•            •            •

Varnum Partner Brendan Best has joined the board of Cass Community Social Services, a Detroit-based nonprofit that works across the city in areas of concentrated poverty, providing programs focused on food, health, housing, and employment. As a board member, Best supports the organization’s mission and strategic initiatives to serve individuals and families in need.

Best leads Varnum’s Bankruptcy, Restructuring and Creditors’ Rights Practice Team. He represents lenders, debtors, creditors, and other stakeholders in complex Chapter 11 restructurings, insolvency-related litigation, and out-of-court workouts. Best advises clients across a variety of industries on restructuring strategies and bankruptcy-related matters.

•            •            •

Honigman’s Jacob Drouillard has been named Advisor of the Year by The Association for Corporate Growth (ACG) Detroit as part of the 11th Annual M&A All Star Awards. 

Drouillard is a partner in Honigman’s Corporate and Private Equity practices where he regularly represents private equity funds and privately held clients in complex business transactions, including leveraged buyouts, strategic mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures, growth equity investments, and recapitalizations.

•            •            •

Miller Canfield is pleased to announce that attorney Amy M. Johnston, co-leader of the firm’s nationally recognized Litigation and Dispute Resolution Group, has been inducted into the International Society of Barristers.

Johnston is a litigator with more than 25 years of courtroom and commercial arbitration experience. She represents clients nationwide in complex commercial disputes and class actions, with particular experience in the banking, energy, manufacturing and real estate industries. Her practice includes business, trade secret, antitrust, environmental, construction, real estate, contract and product liability matters, among many others.

An adviser to clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to startups, Johnston is known for her counsel, trial skills and understanding of clients’ business objectives. In addition to her litigation practice, she advises businesses on risk avoidance and long-term solutions to legal and operational challenges.

Johnston has earned several honors throughout her career, including recognition in Chambers USA, Legal 500 US Detroit Elite for Commercial Disputes, Crain’s Detroit Business’ Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys, Crain’s Detroit Business’ Notable Women in Law, and Michigan Lawyers Weekly’s Leader in the Law. She is also the former chair of Miller Canfield’s Managing Directors.

•            •            •

Taft Detroit attorney Shirley Kaigler received the Wayne State University Black Law Students Association Legacy in Law Award at the organization’s annual reception on April 4 at the Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History.

Kaigler is an attorney in the Private Client practice group. She concentrates her practice in the areas of probate and trust administration, estate, tax, retirement and business succession planning, elder law, and health care proxy and special needs issues. 

Kaigler has experience principally in the area of gift, estate, and tax planning for all estate sizes. Her clients are business owners, professionals in solo and group practices, corporate executives, educators, retirees, and individuals with special needs. 

•            •            •

Howard & Howard Attorneys is pleased to announce that Michael Pappas has joined the firm, strengthening its capabilities at the intersection of health care, technology and regulatory compliance.

Pappas brings more than 20 years of combined in-house, law firm and consulting experience advising health care organizations, technology companies and other industry stakeholders. He focuses his practice on helping clients navigate complex regulatory environments, structure innovative transactions and implement compliant, forward-looking business strategies.

Prior to joining Howard & Howard, Pappas served as general counsel at a digital health company where he oversaw a broad portfolio of commercial, technology and procurement agreements. He has also held senior leadership roles at global consulting and professional services organizations, guiding digital health regulatory and analytics initiatives, as well as prior in-house and private practice roles.

Pappas has experience advising on health care regulation, data privacy, compliance protocols and health data analytics. His work has included leading multi-million-dollar joint ventures, supporting large-scale regulatory modernization efforts and advising on initiatives tied to value-based care and Medicaid transformation. He is also an active participant in and co-founding member of the American Telemedicine Association’s Virtual Foodcare Coalition.

“I’m excited to join Howard & Howard and collaborate with such a strong, nationally recognized team,” said Pappas. “The firm’s entrepreneurial approach and commitment to client service align closely with my practice and the needs of today’s health care and technology players.”

Pappas earned his law degree from Wayne State University Law School.

In the January 15, 2026 edition of The Ingham County Legal News, which is part of The Detroit Legal News network, there is an article titled “Michigan’s 2019 Auto Insurance Reforms Worked, Most Recent Evidence Says” by Michael Van Beek of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

In the January 15, 2026 edition of The Ingham County Legal News, which is part of The Detroit Legal News network, there is an article titled “Michigan’s 2019 Auto Insurance Reforms Worked, Most Recent Evidence Says” by Michael Van Beek of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. This article praises Michigan’s auto no-fault reforms and asserts, among other things, that those reforms have been successful in significantly lowering auto insurance premiums and effectively serving the insurance needs of Michigan families. 

The Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault (CPAN) says that this article requires a rebuttal. CPAN is a broad-based, bipartisan coalition of auto accident victims and their medical providers that was established 23 years ago. CPAN has been extensively involved in analyzing these new laws and assessing the impact that they have had on Michigan consumers. In light of the importance of this issue for all Michigan motorists, CPAN has asked for a thoughtful response from certain individuals who are very knowledgeable about this new law. In that regard, CPAN has requested a reaction from Mr. Douglas Heller, Director of Insurance, Consumer Federation of America, and Stephen Sinas and Tom Sinas of the Sinas Dramis Law Firm, who have represented hundreds of auto accident victims over the years and have written and lectured extensively on this new law. 

These are the reactions of these individuals. 

Douglas Heller 
Consumer Federation of America

Mr. Van Beek’s article relies heavily on an unnamed report released by the Michigan Department of Insurance and Finance Services. However, one of the most important facts omitted from the commentary is a disclaimer in the report itself. The consulting firm Milliman acknowledges that the analysis is “subject to multiple sources of uncertainty” and relies on “many assumptions.” The report further states that its findings could be “materially different” if those assumptions are incorrect. That caveat matters. When a report warns that its conclusions depend on uncertain assumptions, policymakers and commentators should be cautious about declaring definitive success.
The article and report claim drivers are saving money. But according to the report’s own data, that conclusion requires us to make a series of assumptions and adjustments to the actual price Michiganders are paying for insurance. The report’s own chart shows that the average auto insurance premium per vehicle in 2024 was higher than it had been during the previous nine years, including 2019—the year the law was passed. In fact, premiums were at least $100 higher than in 2019.

This directly contradicts the narrative that the reforms dramatically reduced insurance costs. When the full premium data is considered—including comprehensive and collision coverage—the claim of major savings becomes far less convincing. Even within the report, the majority of the claimed savings do not come from structural improvements to the insurance market. Instead, they largely result from reductions in the assessment charged by the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association (MCCA).
Once those assessment cuts are separated from the analysis, the remaining savings are far smaller. In that regard, non-MCCA savings amount to roughly 4.5% at the high end, and that figure excludes increases in comprehensive and collision coverage. In other words, the bulk of the “savings” cited in the report are not the result of market efficiency or better pricing—they come from reducing the catastrophic care funding mechanism that historically protected seriously injured crash victims.

Another major limitation is that the analysis does not account for new costs that consumers now face because of the law. The report does not account for:

• Higher health insurance co-pays and deductibles when auto coverage is insufficient

• Increased liability coverage costs

• Rising umbrella policy premiums

• Additional out-of-pocket medical expenses when drivers choose lower personal injury protection (PIP) limits

• Costs shifted to Medicaid or Medicare

These omissions are significant; so much so that the report authors had to admit – on page three – that these costs “were not included in our analysis.” Lower auto insurance premiums can appear to be a win if the analysis ignores the expenses that are simply shifted elsewhere. Moreover, even if the report’s conclusions are accepted—which they should not be—the analysis fails to measure the broader economic impact of moving costs from auto insurers to individuals and public programs.

Mr. Van Beek’s commentary also suggests that the reforms have not harmed medical care for crash survivors. But the report itself does not reach that conclusion. In fact, the study acknowledges that it could not definitively determine the impact on access to care. Without that analysis—and without consultation with key stakeholders such as medical providers and patient advocacy groups—claims about the reforms’ success for injured motorists are premature.

Supporters of the reforms often claim that lower premiums would lead to fewer uninsured drivers. But the report’s own data suggests the opposite trend. Figure 14 of the report shows that the estimated uninsured motorist rate is higher than it has been since 2016, with the lowest rate since 2019 still at 18.9%. That figure undermines one of the central promises of the reforms.

Finally, despite claims that the law created popular new options for consumers, the report confirms that most Michigan drivers continue to choose unlimited personal injury protection coverage. That preference suggests that most drivers still recognize the value of the full, lifetime, comprehensive protection that defined Michigan’s unique and original auto no-fault system for decades.

Taken together, the data presents a much more complicated picture than the one portrayed in the commentary. Premiums have not clearly declined when measured across the full market. Much of the apparent savings comes from changes to the catastrophic claims assessment rather than improved insurance pricing. And the report itself acknowledges substantial uncertainty in its findings while failing to measure many of the real costs consumers now face.

It should also be emphasized that insurance reform should be evaluated based on the full economic impact on drivers and crash survivors—not just a narrow analysis of selected premium data that requires assumptions and adjustments to make the higher premiums drivers are actually paying sound like savings they have not received. Michigan residents deserve affordable coverage. But they also deserve accurate analysis of whether the state’s auto insurance reforms have truly delivered on their promises.

Stephen Sinas and Tom Sinas 
Sinas Dramis Law Firm

The Sinas Dramis Law Firm has represented thousands of seriously injured accident victims over the last 75 years. In that role, we have seen first-hand, the devastation that catastrophic motor vehicle related injuries can have on the lives of victims and their families. 

Prior to the 2019 Auto No-Fault Insurance Reforms, virtually all seriously injured persons had auto insurance policies that provided full, uncapped, lifelong medical and rehabilitation expense coverage. That is no longer true under the new no-fault reforms. Now, Michigan families do not get that kind of lifetime coverage unless they pay an extra insurance premium to purchase it. If they decide to take advantage of minimal premium discounts by purchasing the limited no-fault medical expense coverages that are now available under this new law, they may very well be left with woefully inadequate insurance protection that will expose them to significant financial loss and inadequate medical and rehabilitation benefits in the event of catastrophic injury. All for what? Unfortunately, they do so to save a few dollars on their no-fault insurance premiums. Based on our experiences, this is a gamble that no Michigan family should take. If they guess wrong, the result will be disastrous. Consider a few of the real-life nightmare scenarios that some of our clients have encountered as a result of the passage of these new reforms. 

The Case of Sarah: Consider the case of Sarah (not her real name), who was living at home with her parents during college. In response to the financial pressures of modern American life, Sarah’s parents decided to purchase a limited no-fault insurance policy with $500,000 in no-fault medical benefits. One day, after taking final exams, Sarah went out for a run. She was jogging in a designated pedestrian lane and was run over and left for dead by an intoxicated motorist. Although Sarah miraculously lived, she is catastrophically brain damaged and will require round-the-clock medical and attendant care for the rest of her life. Tragically, Sarah’s no-fault medical benefits were exhausted before she even left the hospital. Her care will now be funded by a combination of taxpayer dollars and charitable efforts, none of which would have been required had Sarah been injured before the passage of this new law. 

The Case of Annie: Consider the case of Annie (not her real name), who was a minor, living at home with her mother. Her mother worked in a local restaurant and had no health insurance coverage. Consequently, Annie and her mother were covered by Medicaid insurance. The ever-increasing cost of living resulted in Annie’s mother needing to cut expenses. Unfortunately, she chose to do so by purchasing a limited no-fault policy available under the new law that provided medical expense benefits in the amount of only $250,000. One day, Annie was riding in the front-seat of her mother’s vehicle, when a violent head-on collision occurred. As a result of that horrific car wreck, Annie sustained catastrophic injuries, including severe brain damage, paralysis below the waist, multiple fractures, internal injuries, etc. These terrible injuries required Annie to be hospitalized for many weeks. Consequently, her limited no-fault medical insurance benefits were exhausted well before she was discharged from the hospital. Annie now has no insurance coverage other than Medicaid, which pays woefully inadequate medical and rehabilitation benefits for the care of people so terribly injured and disabled as Annie. Moreover, without no-fault coverage, Annie has no in-home attendant care or other important rehabilitation therapy modalities available to her. Her future care will now be funded by taxpayer dollars and charitable efforts, none of which would have been required had Annie been injured before these reforms went into effect. Moreover, to add further insult to injury, the Medicaid system has asserted a lien on a very modest liability settlement that Annie has been offered, which could completely wipe out that settlement. This could not have happened under prior law. 

The Case of Diane: Consider the case of Diane (not her real name), who was living at home with her mother while attending college. Even though Diane’s mother was not well-to-do, she realized the importance of retaining the full, lifetime, uncapped no-fault medical insurance coverage available under prior law. Consequently, Diane’s mother chose to pay a slightly higher premium to continue this comprehensive coverage. Her instincts were right. One day, Diane was crossing the street in a pedestrian crosswalk and was violently run over by a hit-and-run driver. Her injuries were so devastating that it was initially assumed she would not survive. However, with excellent medical care, Diane did survive but she had suffered terrible brain damage. As a result of her injury, she has significant cognitive and functional impairments. She is unable to walk without assistance and is unable to live on her own. Diane will require life-long medical care, which, thankfully, will be available to her because her mother chose not to give up the lifetime medical coverage she had under the no-fault law before it was amended in 2019. As a result, Diane will have unlimited, in-home professional attendant care, vocational retraining, physical therapy, medical transportation and many other benefits that will last for the rest of her life. 

It is our view that these new laws should not, in any way, be praised. Rather, they should be condemned because of the trap they set for struggling Michigan families who are now enticed to sacrifice life-enhancing auto no-fault medical insurance coverage to save a few dollars. It is admittedly true that insurance premiums were, and continue to be, unreasonably high for Michigan consumers. However, the remedy to address that problem is not to take away people’s rights, but rather to vigorously enforce a landmark Michigan Supreme Court decision issued many years ago, ruling that the due process clause of the Michigan Constitution requires that all Michigan motorists must be able to purchase auto no-fault insurance at “fair and equitable rates.” That was the clear pronouncement in the case of Shavers v Attorney General, 402 Mich 554 (1978). Tragically, however, the Michigan Legislature and the Michigan Insurance Bureau have never taken any meaningful steps to enforce this fundamental constitutional protection. Rather, the approach taken has been to diminish benefits, rather than addressing the excessive premium costs of auto no-fault insurance.

What now?
I asked that question after the Women’s March on January 21, 2017, the day after Donald Trump’s first inauguration as president.
I asked it again on June 17, 2025 after the first “No Kings” demonstration.

By Berl Falbaum

What now?

I asked that question after the Women’s March on January 21, 2017, the day after Donald Trump’s first inauguration as president.

I asked it again on June 17, 2025 after the first “No Kings” demonstration.

I posed in once more after the second “No Kings” protest on October 18, 2025.

And now I am asking it again after the third “No Kings” outcry on March 28, 2026.

Sadly, the answer in each case: Nothing.

I have argued about the ineffectiveness of the demonstrations with several “No Kings” supporters but none can point to anything—anything—that has changed.

Not one Trump policy has been altered. Trump has not begun to tell the truth—not even once. He has not tempered his ugly rhetoric. He has not even taken off his crown to rest his head.

And there is a good reason for the impotence of the protests. The two main ones: No clearly defined objective, and no potent meaningful followed up.

One the first point, I also asked “No Kings” defenders, what was their objective(s)? The answers varied all over the place:  stop the Iran war; protect the environment; close up ICE; make abortion legal; fire Steve Miller; bring down gas prices, and allocate more money for animal shelters (the last included facetiously just to prove the point).

The goals are so varied that even protestors cannot agree among themselves what to fight for. This kind of diffusion causes political paralysis.

It all leads to ambiguity and here comes the worst part:

The organizers, when asked about the lack of objectives, proudly proclaimed that “ambiguity” was the major objective. Well, that they achieved. Congratulations!

Unfortunately, effective protests need clearly defined goals, ones which all involved understand and support.  Participants need unanimity; they need to speak with one powerful voice.

Ghandi was not ambiguous in his very targeted civil disobedience that helped India wins its independence from the British. Martin Luther King Jr. was not ambiguous in his fight for justice for blacks. There was nothing ambiguous about the goals of Walter Reuther, the legendary UAW president, and what he wanted to achieve for working men and women.  

Most important, his opposition—employers—understood his goals and what Reuther was prepared to do and sacrifice to achieve labor reform.

Which brings us to the second point: Meaningful follow up. Protests are not enough, not even millions of protestors on the streets.

The opposition must be faced with actions that threatens their power and hurts them economically.  

Dr. King did not just lead picket lines; he initiated economic boycotts in the South. He made segregationists pay for their racism.

Reuther and other labor leaders led local and national strikes to force changes in unfair and abusive labor policies.

(Just a couple of minor examples: What if the 8 million in the most recent protest had pledged not to purchase anything from Amazon for several months. Jeff Bezos might get the message.  

(What if they all pledged not to go to work for a month or longer—declare a national strike. Yes, sometimes sacrifice is required. King and many of his supporters went to prison, some were beaten bloody as was Reuther in the Battle of the Overpass at the Ford Motor Co. in 1937.

(There is no shortage of actions the “No Kings” participants could invoke.)

Countless examples exist throughout the world of effective protests—including revolutions—and “No Kings” organizers would be well-served to study some history on this subject before hitting the streets.  

Reading thousands of news clippings and watching TV coverage of the demonstrations may be satisfying, but it does nothing to produce meaningful change. As one protestor put it: “We must do more than carry clever signs.”

Said the Christian Science Monitor: “…voicing opposition is one thing. Turning it into action is another. The long history of American protests, dating back to the original Boston Tea Party in 1773, shows that not all mass movements produce tangible or lasting results.”

Susan Olzak, emerita professor of sociology at Stanford University, said that to achieve their goals, most movements benefit from sustained activity, media attention, and a stable organizational structure, as well as a clear vision and execution. 

“Movements with a focused and coherent message are often more effective than those appealing to a broad but heterogeneous audience,” she said.

I am going to go out on the limb and state that I believe many went home after the protests feeling a little empty, while asking themselves: “What did I achieve? What happens now?”

Now, to one of those inexplicable coincidences. After finishing a draft of this column, I watched a delightful Broadway musical, “Newsies.” It is the story of poverty-stricken newsboys who suffer from financial exploitation at the hands of Joseph Pulizter, publisher of The New York World.

To be brief: No longer able to endure Pulitzer’s financially suffocating percentage for each paper sold, they form a “union” and manage to organize a general strike in support of their cause in New York City.

Result: These powerless boys brought Pulitzer, at the time, one of the most powerful figures not just in NYC but in the country, to his knees. He relented with more liberal financial policies for the paper boys.

“No Kings” organizers and demonstrators should be required to watch the play. (Beside the political lesson, it’s fun.)

If another “No Kings” protest is planned, I may differ with the objective organizers adopt, but please, please no more ambiguity.
————————
Berl Falbaum is a veteran journalist and author of 12 books.

Butzel attorney Jennifer Dukarski was a featured speaker during the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International’s Automated and Connected Vehicles Digital Summit on March 24. 

Butzel attorney Jennifer Dukarski was a featured speaker during the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International’s Automated and Connected Vehicles Digital Summit on March 24. 

Dukarski’s session was titled, “Legal Issues of Connected Vehicles.” She examined legal issues emerging within the field of connected vehicles and will discuss a few current high-profile cases. 

Dukarski leads Butzel’s Connected and Autonomous Mobility Team. Her automotive experience as a former design engineer, Six Sigma master black belt, continuous improvement lead champion, and quality manager, gives her a unique perspective on balancing the legal issues and business applications of emerging automotive technology. 

Dukarski focuses her legal practice where technology, mobility and communications meet. A leader in the area of electrified, connected and automated vehicles, she negotiated some of the first robotaxi agreements in the world. 

A champion of the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI), Dukarski regularly advises and teaches on AI risk mitigation. She was named one of the 30 Women Defining the Future of Technology by Warner Communications for her innovative thoughts and contributions to the tech industry.

In addition, Butzel immigration law attorney Reginald A. Pacis participated in an “Immigration Law Panel” discussion on March 25, presented by the Immigration Law (Student) Association at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. 

Pacis will also participate in a “Business Immigration Panel” program on March 31, co-presented by the Immigration Law Student Association and the Business Law Society at Wayne State University Law School. The discussion will focus on the fundamentals of business immigration, recent policy and adjudication trends, and career paths in the field. 

Pacis focuses his practice in immigration law and has handled a variety of immigration matters including H-1B specialty occupation cases, L-1 Intracompany transfers, Labor Certification matters, Immigrant Visa Petitions/Adjustment of Status applications and interviews, TN Free trade cases, H-1B Department of Labor Investigations, I-9 employer verification compliance, and U.S. Port of Entry airport and land port interviews. 

He was named Immigration Lawyer of the Year in 2025, 2023 and 2013, respectively in the field of Immigration Law by The Best Lawyers in America and has been listed in Best Lawyers for several years. 

Pacis is a member of the American Bar Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), and the Samahang Pilipino Ng Oakland Filipino organization. He served two consecutive one-year terms from 2003 to 2005 as chairperson of the Michigan Chapter of AILA and was a member of the AILA National Board of Governors for those terms. 

Butzel is also pleased to announce that Sam S. Yousif has joined as an associate attorney in the firm’s Troy office. He partners with businesses to help them navigate complex corporate structures, mergers and acquisitions, and customary commercial transactions. 

A legal advisor for large and small businesses, Yousif provides comprehensive counsel tailored to each client’s unique needs. His practice is centered on helping organizations navigate the intricacies of corporate law, with a focus on contract drafting, negotiation, and the structuring of transactions. Much of Yousif’s work involves guiding clients through asset and entity acquisitions and dispositions.  

He partners closely with clients to structure deals that protect their interests and advance their goals.

In addition to transactional matters, Yousif advises on corporate structure and long-term planning. He assists businesses in choosing and maintaining entity forms that support growth and adaptability, from initial formation to complex reorganizations. 

Yousif earned a law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law, and a Master of Accounting and Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Oakland University. Yousif was named to Michigan Super Lawyers – Rising Stars – Business/Corporate, 2024-2025.

•            •            •

Retired Judge Deborah Thomas will be honored with the Eleanor Roosevelt Award from the Michigan Democratic Women’s Caucus during a luncheon held on April 18.

During her career on the Wayne County Circuit Court bench, Thomas exemplified the highest ideals of the judiciary, ensuring that the courts serve not only as institutions of law, but also as instruments of fairness, dignity, and opportunity.  

Through her work establishing and presiding over one of Michigan’s largest Veterans Treatment Courts, she has shown that justice can be both principled and compassionate. Her community forums addressing expungement, human trafficking awareness, and firearm safety reflect her belief that the law must remain accessible and responsive to the people it serves.

•            •            •

Plunkett Cooney partner Douglas C. Bernstein was recently named by Lawdragon to its 2026 top 500 list of Leading Global Bankruptcy & Restructuring Lawyers.

A member of Plunkett Cooney’s Bloomfield Hills office, Bernstein serves as the firm’s Business Law Department Leader. He concentrates his practice in the areas of commercial litigation, loan restructuring, commercial loan documentation, bankruptcy, banking-related litigation and appeals. His clients include regional and national banks, credit unions and loan servicers as well as automotive suppliers and charitable foundations.

Prior to joining Plunkett Cooney, Bernstein worked as an in-house attorney at Michigan National Corporation for more than 20 years. He subsequently joined the Standard Federal Bank Legal Department when the bank merged with Michigan National Corporation in 2001.

Bernstein earned his undergraduate degree in 1978 from Wayne State University and his law degree in 1982 from the Detroit College of Law. He has received several honors for his legal work, and he is a Fellow of the American College of Bankruptcy. Bernstein has also been honored by Michigan Lawyers Weekly as a Leader in the Law and Go To Lawyer for Business, and he is a 2023 inductee into the publication’s Hall of Fame.

•            •            •

Maddin Hauser is pleased to announce that Mitchell D. Myers has joined the firm. Representing businesses across the full spectrum of complex commercial disputes, including real property, construction, mortgages, financial services, and other business and transactional matters, Myers joins the firm’s Complex Litigation and Risk Advisory practice group.

A trial attorney, Myers’ advocacy skills serve him well in the courtroom, both at the trial and appellate levels. His experience also includes matters of general negligence, construction negligence and contract disputes, and business disputes such as defamation, slander/libel, and corporate interference. 

Prior to joining Maddin Hauser, Myers was a partner at a civil defense firm handling matters of general negligence, auto negligence, construction negligence and contract disputes, and business disputes including defamation, slander/libel, and corporate interference. He has also served as a managing litigation attorney for a no-fault insurer and defended clients’ interests in cases involving claim and delivery, insurance fraud, real property loss, insurance coverage and indemnity, municipal law, premises liability, and general civil litigation. 

Myers also possesses a securities background, with work on commodities, equities, and energy futures trading matters, including FINRA/AML/KYC compliance counseling.

•            •            •

Miller Johnson is pleased to welcome Robert M. (“Bob”) Birach and Ardiola Sinaj to the firm’s Immigration practice. Joining from Birach Law PC, they bring experience across the full spectrum of immigration law, including employment-based petitions, family-sponsored immigration, and appellate immigration litigation. Birach and Sinaj are based out Miller Johnson’s Detroit office.

Birach is an immigration attorney with nearly five decades of practice in Michigan. He focuses on complex immigration matters before federal agencies and courts, including removal defense, asylum claims, waivers of inadmissibility, and appellate litigation. He is also a recognized expert on H-2A (agricultural) and H-2B (nonagricultural) nonimmigrant temporary worker visas, to provide staffing for farms, wineries, nurseries, greenhouses, seasonal resorts, landscapers and other seasonal businesses. 

Birach’s work has earned national recognition, including an AV Preeminent® rating from Martindale-Hubbell for more than 20 years and repeated listings in Super Lawyers, Top Lawyer, and Best Lawyers, along with being named Lawyer of the Year in Immigration Law in 2012. Birach earned a law degree from Cooley Law School and a B.A. from Western Michigan University.

“We are excited to join Miller Johnson’s Immigration team,” said Birach. “We look forward to contributing to a team known for its excellence and deep commitment to the communities we serve.”

Sinaj brings more than a decade of experience representing individuals, families, and employers in a wide range of immigration matters, including employment-based petitions, family-sponsored immigration, waivers, humanitarian relief, and naturalization. Her practice focuses on helping clients navigate complex and rapidly changing immigration processes with clarity and a strong commitment to service. A long-standing member of Birach Law PC, she has played a central role in the firm’s immigration work for many years. Sinaj earned a law degree from Wayne State University Law School and a B.A. from Wayne State University.

Miller Johnson is also pleased to announce that Seth Filthaut has joined the firm’s Detroit office.  He joins as part of the firm’s Employment and Labor Practice, where he will work closely with employers on a wide range of workplace issues. 

Prior to joining the Miller Johnson, Filthaut was the director of Human Resources at Birmingham Public Schools.  In this role, his responsibilities included district-wide HR operations, labor strategy, collective bargaining, investigations, and compliance with federal and state employment laws. His role included negotiations with multiple unionized employee groups, administering discipline, managing grievances, advising on contract interpretation, and supporting district operations through policy development, workforce planning, and cost-saving initiatives.

Before entering public education leadership, Filthaut held HR and labor relations roles at multiple Fortune 500 companies. In these positions, he managed labor relations for large, unionized workforces represented by the UAW and USW, handled complex grievance and arbitration matters, conducted workplace investigations, administered discipline up to and including discharge, and led workforce actions such as large-scale layoffs and recalls.

•            •            •

Bodman PLC is pleased to announce that Jennifer Miller Oertel, co-chair of Bodman’s Exempt Organizations & Impact Investing Practice Group, has been appointed chair of the National Tax-Exempt Council’s State Regulatory Roundtable.

Miller Oertel is an expert on tax-exempt organizations law and impact investing. She provides business advice and practical legal guidance to a range of tax-exempt organizations and impact investors. She leverages her business law background in securities, private equity, mergers & acquisitions, and corporate governance to further the business interests of her tax-exempt clients and the investors who support them.

Miller Oertel is listed in The Best Lawyers in America under Nonprofit/Charities Law and is also recognized in Michigan Super Lawyers and DBusiness Top Lawyers as a leading practitioner for tax-exempt organizations law. Crain’s Detroit Business has selected her as a Notable Women in Law honoree and Michigan Lawyers Weekly selected her as a Leader in the Law. She is a frequent speaker and author on legal issues affecting nonprofits. 

Miller Oertel serves as the expert in residence for impact investing with the Council of Michigan Foundations and serves as a fellow for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation building the impact investing ecosystem in New Jersey. She is an adjunct professor at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University.

Bodman is also pleased to announce that Muhannad (Moe) Al-Ujayli has joined the firm as an associate attorney in the High Net Worth Practice Group.

Based in Bodman’s Detroit office, Al-Ujayli advises high net worth individuals and families on personal and closely held business matters, as well as trusts and estate planning and administration, with a focus on taxation and wealth preservation.

Before joining Bodman, Al-Ujayli was an M&A tax associate at an international Big Four accounting firm, where he advised clients on transactions, tax structuring, stock purchases, and long-term planning strategies.

Al-Ujayli earned his law degrees from Northwestern Pritzker School of Law and Wayne State University Law School.  He also earned a B.A. in Finance from Michigan State University Eli Broad College of Business.

•            •            •

Andrew Turner of Brooks Kushman moderated a panel at the PTAB Bar Association 2026 Annual Conference, leading an interactive roundtable session with PTAB judges.  The session featured small-group discussions with current and former Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges and provided attendees with an opportunity to engage directly with judges on PTAB practice. 

Turner is a registered patent attorney with degrees in electrical and mechanical engineering who focuses his practice on patent prosecution and post-grant proceedings. As co-chair of the firm’s post-grant proceedings group, he has worked on more than 50 IPR matters representing both petitioners and patent owners, as well as reexaminations, reissues, and appeals to the federal circuit. His experience spans autonomous and electrified vehicle systems, LED lighting, audio systems, electronics, and exercise equipment, along with IP portfolio management and opinion work. 

Before entering the legal field, Turner worked as an automotive engineer developing electro-mechanical systems, experience he now leverages to help clients navigate complex technical and business challenges.

Med-Arb combines mediation and arbitration into a single, seamless alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process that blends collaboration and flexibility with finality. When efficiency is the goal, parties may choose to select the same ADR professional to serve as both mediator and arbitrator.

By Laura A. Athens

Introduction

Med-Arb combines mediation and arbitration into a single, seamless alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process that blends collaboration and flexibility with finality. When efficiency is the goal, parties may choose to select the same ADR professional to serve as both mediator and arbitrator. If the dispute does not resolve during mediation, it proceeds to arbitration before the same neutral. This article explores the benefits and risks associated with a single neutral serving in this dual role and identifies safeguards to maximize advantages while minimizing potential drawbacks.

Features of Mediation and Arbitration

Mediation is a voluntary, confidential, and collaborative process facilitated by an impartial mediator. It provides a forum in which parties actively engage in problem-solving to reach their own resolution. Confidentiality is a key characteristic of mediation, allowing parties to explore settlement options without fear that proposals will be used against them in subsequent legal proceedings. Selfdetermination is equally important, as it permits informed decision-making regarding both process and outcome.

In mediation, key participants discuss interests and concerns, brainstorm options, and evaluate potential settlements. The emphasis is on future-oriented solutions rather than past conduct. The mediator lacks authority to impose a decision but by skillful questioning, may offer new perspectives on strengths and weaknesses of the case, likely potential outcomes, or reasonable settlement ranges. Mediation typically includes both joint sessions and private, confidential caucuses with each party and their legal counsel.

Arbitration, by contrast, is a private, efficient, quasi-judicial alternative to litigation. More formal and retrospective in focus than mediation, arbitration involves a neutral arbitrator, or arbitration panel, who reviews evidence, hears testimony, considers legal arguments, and issues a binding decision. Arbitration is particularly useful when mediation fails, compromise is unlikely, or parties seek a final resolution.

The arbitration process can be tailored to meet the needs of the parties. It may be as short or long, simple or complex, and as formal or informal, depending on the parties’ preferences. This flexibility allows arbitration to conserve time and resources while ensuring finality.

Benefits of Med-Arb

As a hybrid ADR model, Med-Arb has the potential to combine the strengths of mediation and arbitration by allowing the parties to initially attempt to resolve the dispute collaboratively. If they cannot achieve full resolution, the matter proceeds expeditiously to arbitration before a neutral who is already familiar with the case.

Although mediation and arbitration require distinct skill sets, an experienced ADR professional can effectively transition between roles. The mediator-arbitrator has been described as combining the analytical precision of a judge with the insight of a psychologist.i

Med-Arb promotes collaborative problem-solving and may preserve ongoing relationships by offering a meaningful opportunity for voluntary resolution before shifting to a more adversarial phase. It maintains privacy and party autonomy, as both processes are private, confidential, and can be structured to meet the parties’ specific needs.

The structure of Med-Arb creates additional incentives to settle. Knowing that arbitration will promptly follow mediation may encourage the parities to make realistic demands and engage in good-faith negotiation. Also, the prospect of a binding decision may narrow the gap between offers and counteroffers.

Med-Arb may expedite a voluntary resolution with a full or partial settlement. Even absent settlement, issues are often narrowed. Parties may abandon marginal claims, voluntarily exclude non-issues, or stipulate to undisputed facts, thereby streamlining the arbitration phase of the process.

Using the same neutral reduces duplicative effort. Selecting and educating two separate ADR professionals requires additional time and expense. Although mediation does not involve formal presentation of evidence, the sole neutral gains substantial knowledge about the dispute during mediation. This familiarity is likely to improve efficiency during arbitration. The rapport, trust, and confidence in the neutral developed during mediation may enhance party comfort in the arbitration phase.

Med-Arb is inherently flexible. Parties may specify a timeframe for mediation, limit the type and amount of discovery, or streamline arbitration procedures. They may agree to limit the number of witnesses, submit joint exhibits, or proceed on documents only. Because the mediator-arbitrator already understands the case, presentation time may be reduced.

Parties may also choose the form of arbitration award: standard, reasoned, or detailed with findings of fact and conclusions of law. A standard award is typically the most cost-effective. Settlement terms may be incorporated into a consent award, strengthening enforceability beyond that of a mediated agreement alone.

Risks of Med-Arb

Despite its advantages, Med-Arb poses certain risks. Critics identify concerns regarding confidentiality, impartiality, due process, diminished candor, and potential undue influence.ii
Confidentiality is foundational to mediation. Mediation communications—oral, written, or nonverbal—are generally inadmissible in subsequent proceedings, subject to limited exceptions, such as threats of harm or party agreement to disclosure.iii However, in Med-Arb, the same neutral hears confidential communications during mediation then later serves as arbitrator, therefore, non-disclosure of mediation communications to the ultimate decision-maker is not possible.

The Michigan Court Rule 2.412 (D)(1) and AAA Commercial Rule M-10 acknowledge that the parties may agree to waive the confidentiality privilege. Therefore, the Med-Arb agreement can expressly retain or waive mediation confidentiality.

Rule 408 of the Federal and Michigan Rules of Evidence similarly exclude offers of settlement from evidence in subsequent proceedings. The rationale is to encourage candid settlement discussions. In Med-Arb, however, exclusion is complicated because the neutral has firsthand knowledge of settlement offers.

Proponents point out that judges and juries are routinely instructed to disregard inadmissible evidence and judges often preside over trials following unsuccessful pre-trial settlement conferences. iv  Nevertheless, critics maintain that the mediator-arbitrator’s dual exposure raises unique concerns.

Due process issues also arise. Arbitration rules generally prohibit ex parte communications,v while mediation routinely involves caucuses. During caucus, a mediator may learn adverse information never disclosed to the opposing party. If the same neutral later serves as arbitrator, there is concern that such undisclosed information may consciously or subconsciously influence the award. The opposing party may have no opportunity to rebut the damaging information through presentation of contrary evidence or cross-examination, raising significant due process concerns.

Another criticism of Med-Arb is the neutral’s dual role may compromise impartiality and independence in arbitration because the neutral may be swayed by the offers exchanged during mediation. A mediator who actively engages in evaluating claims or suggesting settlement ranges may appear to have prejudged the case.vi This risk may be heightened in evaluative mediation, where the mediator offers opinions on the merits of the case and probable outcome. If the dispute proceeds to arbitration, parties may question whether the neutral can remain fully impartial.

Some commentators suggest that Med-Arb may chill candor. Parties might hesitate to propose innovative solutions or engage in frank discussions if the same neutral will later render a binding decision. The mediator-arbitrator may similarly avoid rigorous reality-testing to preserve perceived neutrality. The mediation participants may be reluctant to use caucus at all, potentially diminishing the effectiveness of mediation.vii

Concerns about undue influence have also been raised. Because the mediator-arbitrator ultimately holds decision-making authority, parties may feel pressured to settle.viii However, the risk of coercion often depends more on the individual neutral’s approach than on the structure of Med-Arb itself.

Essential Safeguards

Careful design and informed consent are critical to mitigating Med-Arb risks. Full disclosure of benefits and potential drawbacks should occur before the process begins. Written informed consent from parties and counsel is essential. A comprehensive Med-Arb Agreement should address confidentiality, the benefits, and risks of proceeding with the hybrid ADR process.

Selecting a well-trained, experienced neutral adept in both mediation and arbitration is paramount. One of the most significant risks occurs when an arbitration award appears to be based on confidential mediation communications. Such reliance may create grounds for setting aside an award based on bias or due process violations.

Procedural safeguards can further reduce risk. Conducting mediation exclusively in joint session, rather than caucus, avoids unilateral exposure to undisclosed information. Alternatively, the neutral may seek party consent before disclosing confidential information shared in caucus if essential to fairness. Employing a facilitative, rather than an evaluative, approach may further reduce perceptions of real or perceived bias and prejudgment.

An “opt-out” provision is one of the most straightforward and effective protections. The Med-Arb Agreement may permit any party—or the neutral—to request withdrawal prior to the arbitration phase if impartiality concerns arise during mediation. This preserves party self-determination and enhances confidence in the process.

At the inception of mediation, the neutral should confirm that parties understand the hybrid structure and provide an opportunity to ask questions. Ongoing transparency strengthens legitimacy of the Med-Arb process. 

Concerns about offers influencing arbitration may be addressed through modified high-low arbitration. For example, the highest and lowest mediation offers could define the permissible award range. 

Alternatively, parties may agree to a high-low range disclosed to the arbitrator only after the award is rendered. A confidential, pre-set range may help to ensure the neutral renders an arbitration award based solely on the evidence. If the award falls outside the agreed range, it is adjusted to the closest high or low amount. This approach narrows risk while preserving evidentiary integrity.

Certain ADR professionals may be particularly suited to the dual role. Those experienced in mediation and arbitration and comfortable maintaining clear role boundaries may be better positioned to manage the transition. They may be more interested in solving disputes in a creative way and willing to use their skills to facilitate efficient and effective resolutions for parties who knowingly and voluntarily decide to engage in Med-Arb with a single neutral. Ultimately, parties may conclude that the efficiencies and advantages of Med-Arb outweigh the risks, particularly when safeguards are thoughtfully implemented.

Conclusion

Med-Arb is a distinct option along the ADR continuum. When used in appropriate cases and conducted by a qualified neutral skilled in both mediation and arbitration, it can provide an efficient and flexible path to resolution. Parties electing to pursue this route should receive full disclosure of the benefits and risks of this approach and advised of the essential safeguards. With informed consent and careful procedural design, Med-Arb can effectively balance collaboration and finality while minimizing potential risks.
————————
i Sussman, Edna, Developing an Effective Med-Arb/Arb-Med Process, 2 New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer 71, 73 (Spring 2009); see also, Weisman, Martin and Stark, Sheldon, Is Med/Arb the Process for You? Mich. Bar J. (June 2015)(Med-Arb requires distinct skills, techniques, knowledge, and temperament in each phase of the process). PREMi professionals are experienced in providing Med-Arb services.
ii Pappas, Brian, Med-Arb and the Legalization of Alternative Dispute Resolution, 20 Harvard Negotiation Law Review 157 (Spring 2015).
iii Michigan Court Rule 2.412 (B)(2) (C) (D); Michigan Mediator Standards of Conduct V; AAA Commercial Rules and Mediation Procedures, Rule M-10; ; Section 4(a) of the Uniform Mediation Act (not been adopted in Michigan).
iv Blankley, Kristen, Keeping a Secret from Yourself? Confidentiality when the Same Neutral Serves both as Mediator and as Arbitrator in the Same Case (2011) available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/lawfacpub/122
v AAA Commercial Rule 20.
vi Welsh, Nancy, Switching Hats in Med-Arb: The Ethical Choices Required to Protect Process Integrity in Mediation Ethics: A Practitioner's Guide 213 (Omer Shapira eds., 2021). Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/1482; Rule III of the Mediator Standards of Conduct (mediator must avoid an actual or the appearance of a conflict of interest, defined as, “conduct or a relationship that could reasonably be viewed as creating an impression of potential bias or as raising a question about the impartiality or self-interest of the mediator.”)
vii See supra note 2.
viii See supra note 6.
————————
Laura A. Athens is an attorney, arbitrator, mediator, and facilitator with more than 30 years of litigation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) experience. Athens currently devotes her practice exclusively to ADR in a variety of matters, including civil rights, education, university faculty grievance, consumer, business, employment, vocational rehabilitation, guardianship, and automotive warranty cases.  Athens previously served as a hearing officer in special education and vocational rehabilitation due process hearings.  Athens is an associate of Professional Resolution Experts of Michigan (PREMi), and is on the roster of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) Consumer Panel; DeMars & Associates, CAP Ford Motor, Porsche, and Home Construction Warranty Programs; and National Center for Dispute Settlement.  As an adjunct professor at Wayne State University Law School, Athens taught education law, health law and bioethics. She also taught Legal Research and Writing at Washington University School of Law as a visiting assistant professor. Athens has published numerous articles on arbitration, mediation, facilitation, education and employment law in the Michigan Bar Journal, the Legal News, Laches, Oakland County ADR Quarterly, and Mediate.com.

In her March 31, 1776 letter, Abigail Adams wrote her husband, John Adams, “Remember the Ladies.” Mrs. Adams reminded the her husband of women’s need to have greater rights in the newly formed American government. Her request fell on deaf ears, but 250 years later on Women History Month, Women’s International Day, and Women Judges International Day the Detroit legal community has cause to remember and celebrate the women lawyers and judges, honoring our past and celebrating those who lift as they climb. 

By Zenell Brown

In her March 31, 1776 letter, Abigail Adams wrote her husband, John Adams, “Remember the Ladies.” Mrs. Adams reminded the her husband of women’s need to have greater rights in the newly formed American government. Her request fell on deaf ears, but 250 years later on Women History Month, Women’s International Day, and Women Judges International Day the Detroit legal community has cause to remember and celebrate the women lawyers and judges, honoring our past and celebrating those who lift as they climb. 

“No women allowed, welcomed, or wanted” was the accepted business practice as women graduated from law schools in the late 1960s.  

Regardless of talent, women entered the legal profession facing challenges, barriers, restrictions, and stereotypes. Access to employment, elected positions, and professional associations was restricted. Dress and decorum were policed. It was an absurd thought that a woman could practice law or sit as a judge. 

The Michigan Supreme Court

The Michigan Supreme Court has existed since 1805. The first woman took the bench in 1973. Justice Mary Coleman was elected to the Michigan Supreme Court to a term of service beginning January 1, 1973. She was the first woman to serve as chief justice, holding that position from 1979 until her retirement in 1982. In her first year, she wrote a unanimous opinion that recognized married women's interest in their personal property. Since Justice Coleman, 14 women, many from the Detroit legal community, have served on the Michigan Supreme Court.  Currently, four women sit on the Michigan Supreme Court and Justice Megan Cavanagh serves as chief justice.  

Justices & Years of Service:
• Mary S. Coleman 1973–1982
• Patricia Boyle 1983–1998
• Dorothy Comstock Riley 1985–1997
• Elizabeth A. Weaver 1995–2010
• Marilyn Kelly 1997–2012
• Maura D. Corrigan 1999–2006
• Diane Hathaway 2009–2013
• Mary Beth Kelly 2011–2015
• Bridget Mary McCormack 2013–2022
• Joan L. Larsen 2015–2017
• Elizabeth T. Clement 2017–2025
• Megan K. Cavanagh 2019–Present
• Elizabeth M. Welch 2021–Present
• Kyra Harris Bolden 2023–Present
• Kimberly Ann Thomas 2025–Present

Their biographies are available in the Michigan Supreme Court historical Society website: https://www.micourthistory.org/justices/

The Michigan Court of Appeals

The Michigan Constitution of 1963 created the Michigan Court of Appeals. It commenced operations in 1965. In 1976, Dorothy Comstock Riley was appointed and became the first woman to sit on the Michigan Court of Appeals. Judge Karen Fort Hood was elected and became the first African-American woman on that bench in 2003. In 2022, Judge Sima Patel became the first woman of South Asian descent to serve on the Michigan appellate court. In 2025, Judge Mariam Bazzi was appointed, becoming the first Arab American woman to serve on the Michigan appellate court.

Third Circuit Court

The news headlines read, “Justice dons a skirt” when Lila J Neuenfelt was the first woman elected judge to the Third Circuit Court in 1941.  Cornelia Kennedy followed as the second woman in 1966. In 1980, Judge Lucile Watts took the bench. She was the first Black woman to be elected as a circuit court judge in Michigan. In 1997, Judge Kirsten Frank became the first Presiding Judge of Third Circuit Court’s newly created Family Division.  In 2002, the Michigan Supreme Court appointed Judge Mary Beth Kelly the chief judge of the Wayne Circuit Court, making her the first woman to lead that court. Many women from the Third Circuit like Judge Kelly ascended to higher benches, but in 2004 Judge Kym Worthy left the bench and became the first woman to serve as the Wayne County Prosecutor and the first African-American woman to serve as a county prosecutor in Michigan. In 2005, Judge Charlene Elder was appointed, becoming the first Arab- American Muslim woman judge in the country. Judge Patricia Fresard in 2023, was named as chief judge, becoming the second woman and the first Hispanic person to hold the distinction. These judges have worn skirts, dresses, pants, and hijabs and have ensured justice is accessible to all.

Detroit Recorder’s Court and District Courts in Wayne County

I am still learning and collecting pieces about women history and the Detroit Recorder’s Court and district courts in Wayne county. l look forward to sharing those in the future. In the meantime, here are a few women judge highlights to add to your knowledge:

 Martha W. Griffiths was the first woman elected as a judge of Detroit's Recorder's Court, taking the position in 1953. In 1966, Judge Geraldine Bledsoe Ford joined the bench, becoming the first Black woman judge in Michigan and the first Black woman in the United States elected to a judgeship without the benefit of a prior appointment. When Recorder’s Court merged with Wayne County Circuit Court in 1997, Judge Vera Massey Jones was serving as the chief judge. 

In 1974, Audrey Stroia was selected the first female judge for the 33rd District Court. She was instrumental in the found in the creation of a Downriver Bar Association as well as the Wayne County Family Bar Association.

In addition to the local judges, remember the women lawyers, women bar associations, the women in bar associations and women student associations in the local law schools.

Never underestimate the power of one: In 1970, Attorney Sue Weisenfeld, a Detroit practitioner advocated and won support of Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Brennan for women lawyers wearing pants in the courtroom. Chief Justice Brennan wrote,“ there is nothing inappropriate about trouser suits for women lawyers appearing in the Supreme Court, or any other court in the state. They have achieved wide acceptance among women of good taste in both business and social circles, and would not in these times be looked upon as mere sportswear.”

Local and Affinity Bar Associations

The local and affinity bar associations demonstrate the power of collective effort and collaboration to promote justice and the interests of women in the legal profession.

The Women Lawyers Association of Michigan was created in 1919 before women gained the right to vote.  Honorable Tanya Grillo is the current president. The Wayne reach encompasses Detroit and is led by its president, Jailah Emerson. WLAM Foundation Angel Carole Chiamp credited the association for breaking barriers and ensuring the right for women to enter the front doors of the Detroit Athletic Club and to sit unescorted at a bar.

Carole Chiamp was elected as the first woman President of the Detroit Bar Association in 1982. That was 18 years after Judge Cornelia Kennedy was the first woman named to the board of directors of the Detroit Bar Association. In the historical records at the Detroit Library, there is little mention of the women involved in the Detroit Bar other than the Ladies Reception Committee at a bar event. The Detroit Bar Association has had 10 women presidents since its inception in 1836. Stefanie Regan of Hickey Hauck Bishoff Jeffers & Seabolt will take the oath in June and become the 11th woman president.

The Black Women Lawyers Association of Michigan (BWLAM) was founded July 28, 1992 and incorporated on March 25, 1993.  BWLAM promotes civic education through law and the scholarship and opportunity for black women at all levels of education. Dorothy Dean is the current president and one of the 2026 initiatives is offering book awards for students to several law schools in the area.

State Bar of Michigan President Lisa Hamameh and President-Elect Erika Bryant like many of the previous women presidents of State Bar of Michigan have strong ties to the Detroit’s local and affinity bars. 

Law Schools

Phyllis Crocker served as the first woman Dean of the University of Detroit Mercy Law School (2014-2021).  During her tenure, the portrait of Judge Denise Langford Morris was installed in the school’s atrium, becoming the first official portrait of a woman on the wall. Judge Langford Morris was the first African American judge on the Oakland County Circuit Court. Jelani Jefferson Exum followed Phyllis Crocker as dean and became the first Black woman Dean for University of Detroit Mercy Law. 

 Wayne State University Law School had standouts as well. Joan Mahoney served as dean from 1998 to 2003. She was the first woman law school dean in Michigan. Prof. Frederica K. Lombard served as its first full-time female faculty member (starting in 1966), professor, and interim dean (2003-2004) until her retirement in 2007. She was a founding member of the school’s Commission on the Status of Women. 

The Michigan Women’s Hall of Fame, the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan, and the Black Women Lawyers Association of Michigan are dedicated collectors and the keepers of the records. Thanks to the individual efforts of those such as Lynn Seaks, Carrie Sharlow, Judge Cynthia Stephens, Attorney Nicole Smithson, Attorney Kristina Bilowus the history of Detroit women lawyers and judges is being preserved and remembered. 
————————
Zenell B. Brown is the fairness and accountability administrator  for the State Court Administrative Office. Brown previously served for more than 25 years in various roles at the 3rd Circuit Court culminating in nearly a decade as executive court administrator.