Columns

Miller Canfield has named Matthew P. Allen the recipient of the firm’s 2026 Seryak Award, an internal honor recognizing outstanding pro bono service and commitment to ensuring access to justice.

Established in 2015, the Seryak Award honors the legacy of Richard J. Seryak, an employment lawyer and litigator at Miller Canfield for nearly 40 years. Seryak was committed to helping individuals without resources access the legal assistance they needed and set a standard for professional excellence, client service, and dedication to pro bono and community engagement.

Allen’s pro bono work reflects that legacy in both impact and leadership. Recently, he helped lead a federal civil rights trial on behalf of a Michigan Department of Corrections prisoner alleging assault and battery under Michigan law and excessive force under the Eighth Amendment

In addition to individual representation, Allen has also played a role in supporting the broader legal community. As an officer of the Eastern District of Michigan Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, he led negotiations related to an organizational separation from the national FBA, a multi-year effort designed to preserve and strengthen programming and resources relied on by the federal bench and bar for decades.

“The longer I practice law, the more stewardship I feel for our system of justice, the people who rely on it, and the people who make it function,” Allen said. “Pro bono work allows us to put that stewardship into action, whether we’re helping individuals who would otherwise go without legal representation or supporting the institutions that protect access to justice.”

Allen is also active in civic and professional leadership at the national, state, and local levels. He serves in leadership roles with the American Bar Association, State Bar of Michigan, Oakland County Bar Association, Oakland County Bar Foundation, Detroit Bar Association, and the Eastern District of Michigan Bar Association. He also serves on the board of Leadership Oakland, a leadership incubator for Southeast Michigan professionals across sectors.

•            •            •

Dawda PLC is pleased to announce that Edward C. Dawda and Marc K. Salach have been recognized in Legal 500’s inaugural US Elite rankings for Corporate and M&A in Detroit.

Dawda, a founding member of the firm, brings decades of experience advising clients on complex mergers and acquisitions, corporate reorganizations, and sophisticated financing transactions. He serves as counsel to public and private entities nationwide. 

Salach, a member of the firm, concentrates his practice on corporate structuring, mergers and acquisitions, private equity transactions, and tax planning. He provides counsel to clients ranging from closely held businesses to automotive dealerships, guiding them through complex ownership transitions, financing arrangements, and regulatory compliance matters.

•            •            •

Foley & Lardner LLP partner John Birmingham was announced as an inductee to Michigan Lawyers Weekly’s Hall of Fame.

Birmingham is a trial, arbitral, and appellate attorney and business advisor who guides clients through labor and employment, trade secret and noncompetition, and investigations and crisis management issues. He is the former chair of Foley’s national Labor & Employment Practice and a former member of the firm’s Management Committee.

•            •            •

Clark Hill PLC recently announced that business, technology, and intellectual property litigators Zachary Moen, Daniel Grossman, and Adam Rosenberg,  formerly of ZVMLaw, have joined the firm’s Detroit office.

“Clark Hill’s global and national presence and depth of skill is very attractive to us and to our clients,” said Moen. “We are excited to be able to offer Clark Hill’s breadth of practice areas and enhanced geographic reach to our existing clients, and to offer our experience to Clark Hill’s existing clients.”

Moen represents clients in complex business, technology, and intellectual property disputes and helps clients select, protect, and enforce their intellectual property portfolios. He has more than 20 years of experience providing trusted legal counsel to clients and has served as in-house counsel to both international and family-owned businesses. Moen is a graduate of  Wheaton College (Massachusetts) and Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

Grossman is legal counsel to clients ranging from entrepreneurs and startups to large global companies. He regularly represents clients in federal and state courts in complex litigation matters, including IP litigation, contract disputes, and disputes between shareholders and other business owners. Grossman received his B.A. from Northwestern University and his law degree from the University of Michigan Law School.

Rosenberg provides legal counsel to clients ranging from entrepreneurs and nonprofits to large global companies. He represents clients in federal and state courts in complex litigation matters and regularly advises on compliance, antitrust investigations and other critical issues. Rosenberg graduated from the University of Michigan Law School and received his B.A. from Swarthmore College.

•            •            •

Chelsea Pasquali, an associate at Brooks Kushman, has been named a Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Fellow for 2025. The LCLD Fellows Program offers high-potential, mid-career attorneys from diverse backgrounds at LCLD Member organizations the opportunity to develop leadership skills and build meaningful relationships within the legal profession.

Pasquali is an intellectual property litigation attorney at Brooks Kushman, where she represents Fortune 500 corporations, small businesses, and individuals in complex patent, trademark, trade dress, unfair competition, and copyright disputes. She counsels clients on IP enforcement strategies and has experience representing trademark owners in opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, as well as litigation in state and federal courts and before the Michigan Court of Appeals. 

Pasquali earned her law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law and her Bachelor of Arts from Eastern Michigan University. She has been recognized by Michigan Lawyers Weekly as an “Up & Coming Lawyer” and by Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch for her professional achievements in intellectual property law.

•            •            •

Robert S. Bick, a shareholder with Williams, Williams, Rattner, & Plunkett (WWRP), has been included in the Tier 1 category in Corporate/Mergers & Acquisitions in the just-released Legal 500 U.S. Elite regional listing. Making his debut on the Legal 500 U.S. Elite, Bick is one of only nine attorneys to be listed in the Tier 1 corporate/M & A category in his geographic region. 

As co-chair of WWRP’s Corporate Practice Group, Bick has closed more than $3 billion in M&A transactions, including more than 150 transactions for private equity firms. Historical highlights include serving as M&A counsel to Compuware in numerous domestic and international transactions and as legal counsel to Compuware’s C-Suite executives during its sale to BMC Software in a $2 billion transaction. Bick also served as co-counsel to the owners of the Detroit Pistons in connection with the team’s sale to Platinum Equity.   

Bick’s practice focuses on corporate law, mergers and acquisitions, and business transactions. With 40 years as an attorney, he counsels and represents public and private companies, entrepreneurs, venture capital and private equity groups, boards of directors and business owners on matters related to corporate law, mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, private placements, private equity, securities, tax, commercial and private lending, corporate governance and related business law matters. 

The Legal 500 U.S. Elite acknowledgement follows Bick’s inclusion on the Crain’s Detroit Business 2025 list of Notable Leaders in Mergers & Acquisitions. Additionally, he was named to Michigan Lawyers Weekly 2024 list of Go To Lawyers in Business Transactions. Other career accolades include Corporate Law Lawyer of the Year by The Best Lawyers in America®; M&A Attorney of the Year by the Association for Corporate Growth; Dealmaker of the Year by the M&A Advisor; and a Leader in the Law by Michigan Lawyers Weekly. 

Bick has been recognized on the annual list of Best Lawyers in America® since 2019, Michigan Super Lawyers since 2007, and is a multi-year honoree on the DBusiness Top Lawyers list.

Active in the business and legal communities and civic affairs, Bick is a member of the Detroit chapter of Association for Corporate Growth (ACG), where he has served on the programs committee, as a judge for the ACG Cup Competition at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, and as co-chair for the M&A All Stars Awards. Bick has also served as a multi-year judge for the Transactional Law Competition at the University of Michigan Law School. His civic activities include membership in the American Jewish Committee, where he served on the board of directors for the Detroit Regional Office, and the Anti-Defamation League, where he also served on the board of directors of the Detroit Regional Office. Bick has also provided multi-year service as a mentor to at-risk children at Haven of Oakland County through his participation on the ACG Cares committee and is general counsel and secretary for the McDonald Agape Foundation.

Bick earned a law degree from the University of Michigan Law School and a B.B.A. from the University of Michigan Stephen M. Ross School of Business.
————————
To submit an announcement for the next Legal People section, e-mail: editor@legalnews.com.

By Zana Tomich

With 2026 underway, many Michigan business owners are feeling something they have not felt in a while: a bit of breathing room. Supply chains have steadied. The pace of change feels less frantic. Yet from where I sit, advising mid-sized Michigan companies day in and day out, this is not a year to get comfortable. The risks have not disappeared; they have simply become quieter and more complex.

The businesses that struggle in 2026 will not be caught off guard by a brand-new law. More often, problems grow out of familiar issues that were left unattended for too long. The companies that do well tend to be the ones that treat legal planning as part of running the business, not something reserved for emergencies.

Artificial Intelligence Is Now a Business Risk, Not a Tech Experiment

Most Michigan companies I work with are already using artificial intelligence in some form, often without calling it that. It shows up in hiring platforms, marketing tools, customer communications, and internal drafting. As 2026 unfolds, the legal conversation around artificial intelligence has shifted. The question is no longer whether businesses are using it, but whether they understand how it is being used and who is responsible when something goes wrong.

Michigan does not yet have a stand-alone artificial intelligence statute, but federal guidance is increasingly shaping how courts and regulators evaluate automated decision-making, particularly in employment and consumer-facing contexts. At the same time, contracts are quietly doing much of the regulating. Vendors and customers are asking for representations about artificial intelligence use, data sources, human oversight, and cybersecurity safeguards. Under Michigan law, those 
provisions are likely to be enforced as written, which means companies need to be comfortable with the commitments they are making before they sign.

Data Privacy Expectations Are Catching Up with Smaller Companies

Many Michigan business owners still assume data privacy is an issue only for large technology companies. That assumption is becoming riskier each year. As additional state privacy laws take effect across the country, Michigan businesses can find themselves subject to new requirements simply by collecting data from customers or users who live elsewhere.
Michigan’s Identity Theft Protection Act has been in place for years, but expectations around compliance have matured. Regulators increasingly expect written policies, documented safeguards, and a clear plan for responding to a breach. 

Informal practices that once seemed reasonable can look careless when reviewed after an incident, especially when multiple states are involved.

Worker Classification and Remote Work Remain High-Risk Areas

Few areas create more avoidable exposure for Michigan companies than worker classification. In 2026, both federal agencies and Michigan regulators continue to scrutinize independent contractor arrangements, particularly in professional services, logistics, and remote roles. The analysis remains highly fact-specific, and mistakes often lead to cascading consequences that include wage claims, tax exposure, and benefit issues.

Remote and hybrid work have added another layer of complexity. Wage and hour compliance, overtime tracking, and expense reimbursement obligations do not disappear simply because work happens off-site. Many employee handbooks and compensation structures no longer reflect how work is actually performed, which can leave well-intentioned employers exposed.

Michigan Business Transitions Are Accelerating

Across Michigan, more owners are beginning to think seriously about what comes next. For some, that means a sale. For others, it means an internal buyout or a generational transition. Private equity interest remains strong, but buyers are far less forgiving of informality than they once were. Gaps in governance, undocumented processes, and weak cybersecurity practices tend to surface quickly during due diligence and often affect value.

Even companies that are not actively marketing themselves benefit from thinking like a future buyer. Clear decision-making authority, clean financial practices, and documented systems tend to make businesses easier to operate and more resilient, regardless of whether a transaction occurs.

Nonprofits and Mission-Driven Entities Face More Oversight

Michigan nonprofits and organizations that work closely with them are operating under increased scrutiny in 2026. The Michigan Attorney General’s Charitable Trust Section continues to focus on governance practices, conflicts of interest, and fundraising transparency, while the Internal Revenue Service remains attentive to board independence and compliance.

At the same time, more organizations are exploring benefit corporations and other hybrid structures to balance mission and sustainability. These models can be effective, but only when the underlying governance documents clearly define roles, authority, and fiduciary obligations.

Final Thought

What unites these trends is accountability. Regulators, customers, employees, and business partners are asking better questions and expecting clearer answers. Michigan law has long favored preparation over improvisation, and that remains true in 2026.

Companies that integrate legal foresight into everyday decision-making, rather than treating counsel as a last resort, will be best positioned to manage risk, protect value, and grow with confidence.

2026 is already underway. The opportunity now is to mind your Michigan business before someone else is forced to do it for you.
————————
Zana Tomich is a co-founding partner of Detroit-based Dalton & Tomich PLC, where she serves privately held businesses and nonprofits, often in a general counsel capacity. 

By Erica L. Quigley 
and Adam M. Taub

The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 605 U.S. 303 (2025) not only resolved a longstanding circuit split over the evidentiary burden for majority-group plaintiffs under Title VII, but also signaled a broader shift in how courts may approach employment discrimination claims going forward.

The Court held that members of a “majority group”— i.e., those belonging to groups that have not historically faced discrimination — no longer have a heightened evidentiary burden compared to minority groups: they need not prove “background circumstances” to support that the employer unusually discriminated against the majority.

The plaintiff (who is heterosexual) alleged that her employer violated Title VII when it denied her a promotion in favor of a homosexual female, then demoted her and replaced her in her prior position with a homosexual male. She claimed that her employer denied her the promotion and demoted her because of her heterosexual sexual orientation. While these facts would ordinarily satisfy her burden under the first step of the McDonnell Douglas framework,  under Sixth Circuit precedent, as a member of a majority group, she was required to provide additional evidence, such as statistical proof or information about the relevant decisionmaker’s protected traits. She failed to produce such evidence, leading to dismissal of the case on summary judgment.

Justice Jackson’s opinion emphasized that Title VII protects “any individual” from discrimination based on protected characteristics, regardless of whether the person belongs to a majority or minority group. The Court rejected the Sixth Circuit’s “background circumstances” rule, which had required majority-group plaintiffs to provide additional proof—such as statistical evidence or information about the protected traits the decisionmaker may have—to establish a prima facie case. The Court found this rule to be inconsistent with both the text of Title VII and its own precedent, which discourages rigid applications of the McDonnell Douglas framework.

This ruling effectively levels the playing field for all plaintiffs, removing a procedural barrier that affected only majority-group litigants. As a result, courts must now evaluate claims of discrimination based solely on whether the plaintiff can show that they suffered an adverse employment action because of a protected characteristic—without regard to group membership. This change may lead to an increase in majority-group litigants bringing claims previously characterized as reverse discrimination. It is now much easier for these litigants to meet their prima facie burden, which will likely allow numerous plaintiffs to proceed to trial who would previously have had their cases dismissed on summary judgment.

Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, went further. In his concurrence, he argued that the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework itself lacks textual support in Title VII and should be reconsidered in a future case. He criticized the framework form creating unnecessary complexity and for fostering inconsistent standards between cases involving direct and circumstantial evidence.

Justice Thomas’s critique is not new—he has long expressed skepticism about judge-made doctrines that stray from statutory text. But in Ames, his argument gained new traction. He noted that Title VII’s plain language requires courts to determine whether there is evidence of intentional discrimination, and that the burden-shifting approach may obscure that

inquiry rather than clarify it.

If the Court were to adopt Justice Thomas’s view and eliminate the McDonnell Douglas framework, the implications would be profound:

• Simplified litigation: Plaintiffs would no longer need to navigate the three-step burden-shifting process. Instead, courts would focus directly on whether the evidence supports a finding of intentional discrimination.

• Increased judicial discretion: Without a structured framework, judges may have more latitude in evaluating the sufficiency of evidence, leading to less predictable outcomes.

• Impact on DEI programs: Justice Thomas’s concurrence may invite increased scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Programs that appear to favor minority groups could be challenged under the now-equal evidentiary standard for majority-group plaintiffs.

• Shift in summary judgment practice: The McDonnell Douglas framework has long served as a gatekeeping tool at the summary judgment stage. Its removal could result in more cases proceeding to trial, increasing litigation costs and risks for employers.

Courts analyze employment discrimination claims under the Supreme Court’s framework outlined in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), in which the plaintiff is required to make an initial showing of discriminatory intent, after which the burden shifts to the defendant to provide a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its employment action. If the defendant makes such a showing, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to present evidence that the defendant’s proffered reason is a “pretext,” or cover, for discrimination.
————————
Erica L. Quigley is an Associate at Miller Johnson in the Employment and Labor practice group, focusing on management-side labor and employment counseling and litigation, as well as governmental legal matters. Adam M. Taub is a founding partner at Croson, Taub, & Michaels, PLLC where he specializes in all forms of workplace disputes, including wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, whistleblower, non-compete, and wage and hour issues. This column is reprinted with permission from the Washtenaw County Bar Association newsletter Res Ipsa Loquitur.

Butzel employment law attorney Rebecca S. Davies discussed “Understanding the New Employment Laws for 2026” during a free webinar on Wednesday, January 21. The program was presented by the National Association for Business Resources (NABR) and Corp! Magazine.

Davies concentrates her practice primarily on employment law and commercial litigation.  Drawing on more than 30 years of experience, she advises clients on employment issues encountered in day-to-day business operations and in complex scenarios that can impact employers for years to come. 

Davies has represented and counseled employers of all sizes – from companies with two to 20,000 employees – in private and public sectors in a variety of industries.

•            •            •

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced appointments to the following boards and commissions:

—State of Michigan Retirement Board 

Judge Leo Bowman is a retired judge, having served the 6th Circuit Court of Oakland County for fourteen years. Bowman earned a bachelor’s degree from Oakland University and a law degree from the University of Detroit School of Law. 

Bowman is reappointed as a member or retirant of the Judges Retirement System for a term commencing January 15, 2026, and expiring December 31, 2029. 

The State of Michigan Retirement Board was created by Executive Order No. 2015-13, and consolidated the State Employees’ Retirement System Board, the Judges’ Retirement System Board, and the Military Retirement Provisions. Housed in the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget, in the Office of Retirement Services, the Retirement Board provides oversight of the three systems that service nearly 88,000 active and retired employees.  

This appointment is not subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. 

—Michigan Indigent Defense Commission 

Coriann McMillen is an associate attorney at Nyman Turkish PC and is a member of the Wolverine Bar Association. McMillen was previously a staff attorney at the Neighborhood Defender Service. McMillen earned a Bachelor of Science in sociology and criminal justice from Central Michigan University and a law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. 

McMillen is appointed to represent members nominated by state bar associations those whose primary mission or purpose is to advocate for minority interests for a term commencing January 15, 2026, and expiring April 1, 2028. McMillen succeeds Kimberly Buddin, whose term has expired. 

The Michigan Indigent Defense Commission was created as a result of efforts to improve legal representation for indigent criminal defendants. The Commission develops and oversees the implementation, enforcement, and modification of minimum standards, rules, and procedures to ensure that indigent criminal defense services providing effective assistance of counsel are delivered to all indigent adults in this state consistent with the safeguards of the United States Constitution, the State Constitution of 1963, and with the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission Act.   

This appointment is not subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. 

—Utility Consumer Participation Board 

Jeremy Orr is the director of partnerships at Earthjustice and a professor at the Michigan State University College of Law and University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. Orr earned a Bachelor of Science in human development and family studies and a law degree from the Michigan State University College of Law. 

Orr is appointed as an advocate for the interests of residential utility consumers for a term commencing January 15, 2026, and expiring January 12, 2027. Orr succeeds Sam Passmore, whose term has expired.  

The Utility Consumer Participation Board provides grants to qualified applicants that represent the interests of Michigan’s residential energy (gas, electric, and other fuel) utility customers at residential energy proceedings before the Michigan Public Service Commission. Funding is generated through annual assessments of certain regulated utility companies.    

This appointment is not subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. 

•            •            •

The Catholic Foundation of Michigan (Foundation) recently named Plunkett Cooney partner Laura L. Brownfield to its board of directors. 

The Foundation’s board members, who serve three-year terms, provide governance, strategic oversight and financial stewardship.  They guide the Foundation, which is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization, in its mission to inspire giving, manage endowments and help donors with charitable planning. 

Brownfield serves as the Trusts & Estates Practice Group leader of Plunkett Cooney.  In addition to 30 years of experience in estate planning and estate administration, Brownfield has experience in the areas of business and nonprofit law, counseling closely held businesses and tax-exempt organizations. 

Utilizing her in-house experience as the former general counsel of the Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan, Brownfield’s nonprofit law practice includes establishing tax-exempt organizations, providing strategic and practical business advice, ensuring compliance with federal and state laws and regulations, and navigating the intersection of business and law to protect the interests of nonprofits in carrying out their mission. 

Brownfield’s trusts and estate practice includes working with clients to develop comprehensive plans for the management of assets during their lifetimes, the protection of their assets in the event of disability, and the tax-efficient transfer of their wealth during their lifetime and upon death. She also assists individuals and families with succession planning for closely held businesses and with implementing charitable giving plans to protect their financial interests and to ensure a meaningful personal legacy for her clients. In addition, Brownfield assists fiduciaries and beneficiaries in trust and estate administration matters and in the resolution of disputes arising from the administration of wills and trusts. 

Brownfield received her law degree from Wayne State University Law School in 1995 and her undergraduate degree from Miami University in 1992.

•            •            •

Several Honigman attorneys were recognized by the Legal 500 in it’s inaugural Elite City Focus listing in Detroit for excellence in Commercial Disputes and Corporate and M&A. 

The firm congratulates the following attorneys who received this honor:

—Commercial Disputes 
   Joseph Aviv
   Raymond Henney
   Mark Stern
   I.W. Winsten

—Corporate and M&A
   Mike DuBay
   John Kanan
   Alex Parrish

•            •            •

Michigan Auto Law proudly announces that litigation attorney Alexander P. Kemp has achieved Board Certification in Truck Accident Law from the National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA).

With Kemp’s recent accomplishment, Michigan Auto Law is now the only law firm in Michigan with more than one board-certified trucking lawyer, and one of just three law firms in the country with multiple board-certified trucking lawyers.

Board Certification in Truck Accident Law from the National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA) is limited to lawyers who possess an enhanced level of skill and expertise in truck accident law and have demonstrated integrity and dedication to the interests of their clients. Lawyers must also pass a written examination that tests their proficiency, knowledge, and experience in truck accident law.

Having achieved Board Certification in Truck Accident Law, Kemp is one of only 87 lawyers throughout the entire U.S. to have Board Certification in Truck Accident Law. Kemp is also one of only two Michigan-based attorneys to have earned board-certification status. 

•            •            •

Cummings, McClorey, Davis, & Acho is pleased to announce that Jim Acho has been named an equity partner/shareholder of the firm. 

Acho joined the firm in 2000 as an associate attorney and was elected a partner of the firm in 2015. He has continuously contributed to the growth of the firm over the past 25 years and has won cases of significant import and national attention.  In 2025 Acho was awarded Michigan Lawyer’s Weekly’s Leader In The Law.

CMDA is also proud to announce that Alexander R. Karana has been selected to the 2026 Illinois Rising Stars List by Super Lawyers in the Intellectual Property practice area category. This is the third consecutive year that he has been named to the list. Karana is an Intellectual Property attorney and is admitted to practice law in Illinois and Michigan.

As a registered patent attorney, Karana’s practice centers on patent and trademark prosecution, IP strategy, technology-driven business transactions, as well as business formations and business litigation. He also brings expertise in Entertainment and Sports Law, helping athletes, musicians, and influencers protect and monetize their assets.

•            •            •

John R. Fleming, an equity partner at Giarmarco, Mullins, & Horton PC, will host four small business workshop sessions in 2026.  Fleming will present on a range of topics relevant to the Southeast Michigan business community.  Each session will include a question-and-answer segment and open discussion.

The workshops are hosted by the Macomb County Chamber of Commerce and will take place on the following dates:

• February 9 – How to Avoid Being Sued: Preventable Business Disputes

• June 24 – Protect Your Business: Non-Competes & Trade Secrets

• September 17 – Legal Mistakes Growing Businesses Make and How to Avoid Them

• December 11 – Contracts That Protect You: Clauses You Should Have in Every Contract

Additional information and registration are available on the Chamber’s website at macombcountychamber.com.

Fleming serves on the Board of Directors of the Macomb County Chamber of Commerce, the Macomb Foundation, and Macomb Advocacy for Business.  He is counsel for businesses of all sizes, litigating complex shareholder, trade secret, non-compete, and contract disputes.  His practice includes the defense of physicians and hospital systems in medical malpractice cases.  Fleming represents large financial institutions and manages a vast portfolio of commercial lending litigation.  His experience extends to constitutional law and multifaceted class action litigation.  

•            •            •

Harness IP is pleased to announce that Colette Verch has been selected to participate in the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) 2026 Pathfinder Program. The program supports early-career attorneys through leadership development, career strategy, and access to a broad professional network, and identifies participants as emerging leaders within the legal profession.

As an associate attorney with Harness IP in the Detroit Metro office, Verch is focused on intellectual property litigation in matters concerning trademark infringement, copyright infringement, false advertising, and patent infringement. She also practices patent prosecution, and has experience preparing and prosecuting domestic and foreign patent applications, and preparing invalidity, patentability, and freedom-to-practice opinions.

Harness also congratulates Jeremiah Foley on completing the 2025 LCLD Pathfinder Program.

Foley, also of the Detroit Metro office, devotes his time and energy to protecting his clients’ array of intellectual property rights. He uses his mechanical engineering background and previous work experience to provide efficient counseling that protects innovative ideas and hard-earned competitive advantages. His practice includes working with clients in the software, automotive, manufacturing, and mechanical industries.

Harness IP has been a member of LCLD since 2021 and remains committed to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion within the legal profession.

By Marie E. Matyjaszek 

When a personal protection order (PPO) is granted in Michigan, it is supposed to give the petitioner assurance that the perpetrator will abide by the court order restricting contact with the petitioner. Once the PPO is granted, it must be served upon the respondent so he or she knows that the PPO exists and what the restrictions entail.

However, police officers charge a service fee and mileage to serve the respondent with the PPO, and private process servers can cost considerably more. The exact cost can vary depending on which department provides the service, and coming up with the money can be difficult for the petitioner, ultimately delaying service. Most PPOs involve some form of domestic violence, a significantly underreported crime. Forms of control exerted by the perpetrator include financial, leaving the victim little to no access to money.

Michigan Senate Bills 611 and 612 have been approved by the Senate and would provide service of the PPO within 72 hours at no charge to the petitioner. The PPO would designate a law enforcement agency located within the respondent’s jurisdiction as responsible for serving the order on the respondent. However, the petitioner could use another police agency or competent adult (not a party) to serve the respondent, if desired. The costs associated with law enforcement serving the PPO would come from the Personal Protection Order Service Fund, which has already secured $1 million as part of the 2026 state budget. 

The tragic death of Latricia Green, who was killed in August 2025 by her ex-husband, stresses the importance of this legislation. While she had an outstanding PPO against him, it had not been served at the time of her death. Forty-three states already provide free service of PPOs, leaving Michigan in a very small minority.  This legislation recognizes that money should not dictate a person’s safety.
————————
Marie E. Matyjaszek is a judicial attorney at the Washtenaw County Trial Court; however, the views expressed in this column are her own. She can be reached by emailing her at matyjasz@hotmail.com.

By Michelle A. Behnke

The American Bar Association echoes the concerns of Loretta H. Rush, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, who encouraged judges to remain vigilant after Tippecanoe County (Ind.) Superior Court Judge Steven P. Meyer and his wife, Kimberly Meyer, were shot at their home Jan. 18. “You must not only feel safe,” she wrote in an open letter to state judges, “you must also be safe. Any violence against a judge or a judge’s family is completely unacceptable.”  

While a motive in the shooting has not yet been determined, the ABA recognizes that judges face an unprecedented level of attacks and threats. The U.S. Marshals Service, which protects federal judges, has recorded 2,256 threats against federal judges since 2022. The threat level faced by state court judges is harder to determine because there is no national reporting system to track comprehensive state-level statistics. Available local data reveals widespread issues. In Maricopa County, Arizona, for example, more than 400 serious threats were reported against state judges from 2020-2023.

No judge should feel threatened because they did their job and made a ruling. Justice and democracy cannot operate if decisions are influenced by a judge’s concern over their safety or the safety of their families.

In November, the U.S. Senate passed the bipartisan Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act (S.2379) by unanimous consent. The bill would establish a State Judicial Threat Intelligence and Resource Center to provide technical assistance, training and monitoring of threats for state and local judges and court personnel and address the importance of pooling state resources to ensure the safety of state and local judges.

The ABA urges the U.S. House of Representative to pass this important bipartisan bill and continue to protect judicial independence by taking the necessary steps to provide safety and security to all our judges and court personnel.
————————
Michelle A. Behnke, a member of the Boardman Clark law firm in Madison, Wisconsin, is president of the American Bar Association.  Prior to joining the firm, she was the principal of the firm Michelle Behnke & Associates, where her practice focused on business, real estate and estate planning. Behnke’s experience in the real estate area was recognized by her election to membership in the American College of Real Estate Lawyers.  She has also been elected into The American Law Institute, the American Bar Foundation Fellows and the Wisconsin Bar Foundation Fellows.

(https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2026/01/aba-president-statement-re-violence-against-judges/)