So you have finally triumphed after a long legal battle and obtained a judgment in favor of your client against the defendant Darn Debtor, Inc. (“Debtor”). However, no sooner do you have your judgment then the defendant’s counsel informs you that their client is judgment proof and won’t even bother with an appeal. What is likely to happen next?
The plaintiff’s attorney will very likely conduct...
Last month, we discussed the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision in Madugula v. Taub, 2014 Mich. LEXIS 1281 (July 15, 2014), in which the Court held that shareholder oppression claims, including those seeking damages, can only be tried before judges sitting as courts of equity. This month, we focus on one of the strategic implications of that decision: does Madugula apply to limited liability...
When attorneys stride into court to argue the merits of a request for a preliminary injunction, they are usually focused on arguing the merits of the plaintiff’s claims. Convincing the judge that the plaintiff either does or does not have a likelihood of succeeding on the merits is obviously important. However, frequently the main battleground at the hearing will be the irreparable harm...
Few accusations raise the hackles of clients more than claims that they defrauded someone. Understandably, the client accused of fraud wants his or her attorney to prove that he or she was honest and forthright in the parties’ dealings. When you win a summary disposition motion dismissing a fraud claim, you will certainly have one happy client.
However, when you take discovery in a fraud...
On January 2, 2013, the Michigan Legislature enacted new legislation that can have the effect of “trumping” the previous six-month discovery rule applicable to attorney malpractice claims.
Previously, legal malpractice claims were subject to a two-year statute of limitations (two years from the last date of service performed by the attorney), with a six-month “discovery rule” exception. That...
