Columns

Legal People ...

November 01 ,2024

Attorneys Karen Collingsworth-Crusse and Andrew J. Lorelli recently joined Plunkett Cooney as members of its Trusts & Estates Practice Group.


:  
Attorneys Karen Collingsworth-Crusse and Andrew J. Lorelli recently joined Plunkett Cooney as members of its Trusts & Estates Practice Group.

A senior attorney in the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office, Collingsworth-Crusse brings deep wealth management, family office, and business succession planning experience to the firm from her combined 25 years of law practice and working with families as an advisor and Certified Exit Planning Advisor for several of Michigan’s leading banks. She creates strategies for closely held business owners to protect, build value, and transition from their businesses. Collingsworth-Crusse also works with the family during this process, using governance tools and resources, to support effective communication and family harmony.

In addition, Collingsworth-Crusse provides advice-based solutions focused on trust administration, estate planning, wealth strategy and business succession, and she leads an internal team of cross functional attorneys and support staff professionals, to provide best-in-class service, solutions and thought leadership.

A member of the State Bar of Michigan Probate and Estate Planning Section, Collingsworth-Crusse is a sought-after speaker and content developer for related symposiums in Michigan, Indianac and Ohio. She received her undergraduate degree in 1995 from Oakland University and her law degree in 1998 from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.

Lorelli joins the firm as an associate attorney in the Bloomfield Hills office and has a decade of experience working in the areas of trust and estate planning, and trust and probate administration, including decedent estates, guardianships, conservatorships, and special needs trusts.

A member of the Oakland County Bar Association and State Bar of Michigan Probate & Estate Planning sections, Lorelli served four years on active duty as a judge advocate in the U.S. Marine Corps, having been stationed in Okinawa, Japan, and several years as a lawyer in private practice. Lorelli drafts estate plans for a wide variety of clients; prepares fiduciary accounts in trusts, decedent estates and conservatorships; and handles contested and uncontested probate matters in dozens of counties all over the state of Michigan.

Lorelli received his undergraduate degree in 2009 from the University of Michigan and his law degree in 2013 from the University of Iowa College of Law.

In addition, attorney Elena Djordjeski recently joined Plunkett Cooney as a member of its Torts & Litigation and Transportation Law practice groups.  

A member of the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office, Djordjeski maintains a litigation defense practice that includes claims involving motor vehicle liability, premises liability, general negligence, breach of contract and municipal liability.

With nearly a decade of experience as a trial attorney, Djordjeski represents individuals, businesses, insurance carriers and municipalities in cases involving slip, trip and fall claims, first- and third-party No-Fault benefits, uninsured and underinsured motorist claims, commercial trucking and third-party transportation liability, special investigations fraud, dramshop/liquor liability issues and disputes involving contracts, construction defects, negligence and other civil claims.

Selected as a Rising Star by Super Lawyers magazine since 2022, Djordjeski is a member of the Detroit and Oakland County bar associations, as well as the State Bar of Michigan. She is also a member of the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan.

Admitted to practice in state and federal courts in Michigan, Djordjeski received her law degree from Cooley Law School in 2015.  She earned her undergraduate degree from Michigan State University in 2012.

•            •            •

Regan K. Dahle
has rejoined Butzel as a shareholder in the firm’s Labor and Employment practice group. Preceding her return to the firm, Dahle served as vice president and associate general counsel, Human Resources, of a national third-party administrator of Taft-Hartley, multi-employer benefit plans.

Dahle focuses her practice in the areas of Employment Law and Labor Relations. She counsels and defends employers in arbitrations, unfair labor practice and representational proceedings, and employment-related litigation including sexual and racial harassment, age, gender and racial discrimination, wage and hour, breach of contract, and intentional tort litigation.

She has practiced in federal and state courts and before various administrative agencies including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Michigan Department of Civil Rights, National Labor Relations Board, and Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.

During her decades-long career, Dahle has advised clients on a wide range of labor and employment-related issues. Her experience includes advising employers on managing Family and Medical Leave Act leaves, responding to disability accommodation requests, conducting workforce reductions, and issuing discipline and discharge.  She has also drafted employee handbooks and employment policies, employment applications, independent contractor agreements, and employment agreements. She advises clients on Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) compliance, drafts Affirmative Action Plans, and represents federal contractors in OFCCP audits.

Her clients include community colleges, universities, hospitals, medical practices, automotive suppliers, third-party administrators, and city and county governments.

Dahle frequently serves as a presenter on various Labor and Employment Law topics, including OFCCP compliance, effective employee handbooks and employment applications, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sexual harassment, alternative working arrangements, and ADA accommodations. She is co-author of the Chapter “Dealing with the Unionized Workforce” in the Institute of Continuing Legal Education’s publication, Employment Law in Michigan.

Dahle is a member of the State Bar of Michigan – Labor and Employment Section, Ohio State Bar – Labor and Employment Section, and is the former chair of the Washtenaw County Bar Association Labor and Employment Section. She is a graduate of Leadership Ann Arbor.

She has been named to Best Lawyers in America®, Litigation – Labor and Employment, 2018 – 2022; Employment Law - Management, 2022; Labor Law – Management, 2021-2022; DBusiness Top Lawyers Metro Detroit, Labor and Employment Law, 2021 – 2022; Civil Rights Law, 2011 – 2012. She is a Fellow of the Michigan State Bar. She also is the board secretary for the Humane Society of Huron Valley, Board of Directors.

Dahle is a graduate of Wayne State University Law School and the University of Michigan, B.A.

•            •            •

Varnum LLP
is pleased to announce that Caleb Griscom has joined the firm’s Birmingham office as counsel on its Corporate Practice Team. Griscom brings a background in M&A and private equity transactions, having advised on a variety of deals, including mergers, equity and asset purchases, carve-outs, sale-leasebacks, and cross-border transactions.

Griscom has experience in corporate transactional matters, handling everything from drafting purchase agreements to coordinating complex closings. He also assists clients with general corporate matters, including entity formation, corporate governance, and equity documentation.

In addition to his legal experience, Griscom served as a logistics officer in the United States Marine Corps, where, among other roles, he led an engineer support platoon in Afghanistan and received the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal.

He earned a law degree from Stanford Law School and a Bachelor of Science in Economics from the United States Naval Academy.

In addition, Varnum estate planning attorney Rebecca Wrock has been re-elected to serve a three-year term as a council member of the Probate and Estate Planning Section of the State Bar of Michigan. The council oversees Michigan’s probate and estate planning attorneys, focusing on education, law development and Michigan appellate court decisions.

Wrock is an active member of the Probate and Estate Planning Section and has helped drive the progress of estate planning law in Michigan. As a member of Varnum’s Estate Planning Practice Team, her practice covers all areas of estate planning and estate settlement, including tax planning, charitable gift planning, business succession planning and long-term care planning. She has helped clients with everything from simple estate plans to complex strategies, ensuring protections for minor children, aging parents, loved ones with disabilities and even animal companions through pet trusts.

Wrock also serves as a council member and chair-elect of the Animal Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan. She is also involved in the nonprofit sector, having served as past chairperson of the board of Barn Sanctuary and vice president of the board of Attorneys for Animals.

Wrock has earned honors from Michigan Lawyers Weekly, Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers and the National Law Review. She also serves as adjunct faculty at Wayne State University Law School and regularly contributes to the Institute of Continuing Legal Education.

•            •            •

Brooks Kushman
is pleased to announce that its newest associates have received their Michigan Bar exam results. Abdulai Rashid, Yasmeen Moradshahi, and Cameron Anstess are the newest additions to the firm’s intellectual property team.

Rashid focuses his practice on patent prosecution and litigation in the biomedical and automotive fields. He has experience in contract drafting, filing trademark applications, as well as aiding clients with turning their ideas into businesses or patentable inventions. Rashid earned a law degree from Penn State Law School. He passed the Virginia bar before graduating law school. He also received a Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from Central Methodist University.

Moradshahi is a patent attorney specializing in patent prosecution and litigation with a focus on electrical and mechanical engineering, particularly in the automotive sector. She brings hands-on experience from her time working at a major automotive company, where she contributed to the manufacturing controls simulation lab, diesel launch team, and patent profiling in the IP department. Before joining Brooks Kushman as an attorney, Moradshahi spent three years as a technical specialist with the firm, building a foundation in intellectual property law. She earned her law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law and a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Kettering University.

Anstess is specializes in patent prosecution and litigation with expertise in battery chemistry patents. His background in chemical engineering enables him to navigate complex technical matters with precision. Anstess has worked on a variety of patent matters, leveraging his understanding of both the legal and technical aspects of intellectual property. Before joining Brooks Kushman, Anstess gained experience in the healthcare industry as a quality manager for a healthcare software development company. In this role, he developed a keen attention to detail and a deep understanding of regulatory processes, which now informs his approach to intellectual property law. Anstess earned his law degree from Wayne State University Law School and a Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from Michigan State University.

PREMi ADR SPOTLIGHT: Adverse inferences in arbitration

November 01 ,2024

Introduction: This is an overview of adverse inferences in labor arbitration. This includes reviewing provider organization rules, labor arbitration awards, case law, and treatises on labor arbitration.
:  
By Lee Hornberger

Introduction

This is an overview of adverse inferences in labor arbitration. This includes reviewing provider organization rules, labor arbitration awards, case law, and treatises on labor arbitration.

American Arbitration Association (AAA) Rules


The AAA Labor Arbitration Rules and the AAA Employment Arbitration Rules do not explicitly mention adverse inferences.

AAA Consumer Arbitration Rule 23 “Enforcement Powers of the Arbitrator” indicates:       

The arbitrator may issue any orders necessary to enforce the provisions of rules R-21 and R-22 and to otherwise achieve a fair, efficient, and economical resolution of the case, including, but not limited to: ...

(d) in the case of willful non-compliance with any order issued by the arbitrator, drawing adverse inferences, excluding evidence and other submissions, and/or making special allocations of costs or an interim award of costs arising from such non-compliance; … . Emphasis added.

AAA Commercial Arbitration Rule 24 says:

The arbitrator shall have the authority to issue any orders necessary to enforce the provisions of Rules R-22 and R-23 and any other rule or procedure and to otherwise achieve a fair, efficient and economical resolution of the case, including, without limitation: ...

(d) in the case of willful non-compliance with any order issued by the arbitrator, drawing adverse inferences, excluding evidence and other submissions, and/or making special allocations of costs or an interim award of costs arising from such non-compliance; ... . Emphasis added.

National Arbitration and Mediation


National Arbitration and Mediation Employment Rules and Procedures, Rule 14(D), says:

The Arbitrator shall have the power to award sanctions against a Party for the Party’s failure to comply with these Rules or with an order of the Arbitrator. These sanctions may include an assessment of costs, prohibitions of evidence or, if justified by a Party’s wanton or willful disregard of these Rules, an adverse ruling in the Arbitration against the Party who has failed to comply. Emphasis added.

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)


Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Code of Arbitrators for Industry Disputes Rule 13212 says:

(a) The panel may sanction a party for failure to comply with any provision in the Code, or any order of the panel or single arbitrator authorized to act on behalf of the panel. Unless prohibited by applicable law, sanctions may include, but are not limited to: ...

•  Making an adverse inference against a party;
•  Assessing postponement and/or forum fees; and ...

(b) ...

(c) The panel may dismiss a claim, defense or arbitration with prejudice as a sanction for material and intentional failure to comply with an order of the panel if prior warnings or sanctions have proven ineffective. Emphasis added.

Adverse inferences in labor arbitration awards


Heinz, NA, 132 LA 1089 (Hornberger, 2013) [cited at Elkouri & Elkouri, How Arbitration Works (8th ed. 2016), p. 8-51], stated:

The Union argues that the fact that the Company failed to produce ___ and ___ to testify supports the Union’s position concerning the creditability of witnesses. This argument does not control for a number of reasons. First, ___ and ___ are bargaining unit employees who may or may not have witnessed the activity in the vicinity of the ___ Room. The record is silent as to whether they are Union officials. Second, they were equally available to both sides as witnesses. They were not peculiarly within the Company’s control. Third, given the fact that these bargaining unit employees were equally assessable to the Union, I do not make an adverse inference against the Company for not calling them.

The failure of a party to call as a witness a person who is available and should be able to provide important testimony may permit an arbitrator to form an inference that the testimony would have been adverse to the party that did not call such person as a witness. Elkouri & Elkouri, pp. 8-51 to 8-52.

Sometimes party A argues that the fact party B failed to call certain employees to testify supports party A’s position concerning the credibility of witnesses. Arbitrators look at whether these employees were equally available to both sides as witnesses. Were the witnesses peculiarly within the other party’s control? Were these bargaining unit employees who were equally assessable to the party?

Michigan case law concerning adverse inferences in arbitration

In UHG Boca, LLC v Medical Mgt Partners, Inc, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued January 18, 2024, Docket No. 361539, lv den ___ Mich ___ (2024), after the arbitrator issued the final award, the plaintiff moved to vacate in part the award, asserting the arbitrator improperly applied the wrongful conduct rule. The arbitrator had concluded the revenue plaintiff was seeking from defendants was the result of illegal patient billing or other illegal business practices, and, in the arbitrator’s viewpoint, it would be contrary to public policy to enforce the agreements. The plaintiff also argued the arbitrator improperly applied the adverse inference rule when the arbitrator concluded, on the basis of adverse inference, that the parties were conducting an illegal enterprise. The Circuit Court disagreed with the plaintiff and confirmed the award. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court.

The arbitrator assigned an adverse inference to the decision of certain witnesses not to testify regarding illegally obtained  police reports. The Court of Appeals indicated:

The privilege against self-incrimination permits a defendant to refuse to answer official questions in any other proceeding, no matter how formal or informal, if the answer may incriminate him or her in future criminal proceedings.” In re Blakeman, 326 Mich App 318, 333; 926 NW2d 326 (2018). However, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them: the amendment does not preclude the inference where the privilege is claimed by a party to a civil cause.” Id. at 334 n 4 (quotation marks and citation omitted). While plaintiff is correct that certain witnesses that did not testify were defendants, individuals associated with plaintiff also refused to testify at the hearing. Moreover, contrary to plaintiff’s assertion, the arbitrator did not rely solely on the adverse inferences when he made his determination that the businesses were operating in an illegal fashion. Accordingly, the arbitrator did not err when it applied the adverse interest rule. Emphasis added.

Lustig v Dep’t of Health and Human Services, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued March 12, 2020, Docket No. 346447, lv den ___ Mich App ___ (2020). Defendant employer argued plaintiff employee’s due process rights were not violated by the employer’s failure to produce all of the requested documentation because he had the opportunity to be heard and to defend himself by subpoenaing the testimony of other employees to provide the information he sought. Plaintiff employee argued he was unable to present an adequate defense because he lacked requested documentation regarding his work requirements and objectives in comparison to other similarly situated employees and thus he was denied procedural due process. The Court of Appeals agreed with defendant, reversed the Circuit Court’s order, and reinstated the Michigan Civil Service Commission’s decision upholding the Hearing Officer’s determination that defendant had just cause to terminate plaintiff’s employment. The Court of Appeals indicated: “[T]he record belie[d] plaintiff’s contention that he was not afforded a fair opportunity to present an adequate defense without receiving all of the documentation that he had requested.”

In Santamauro v Pultegroup, Inc, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued December 20, 2016, Docket No. 328404, the plaintiff employee agreed to arbitrate claims arising from his employment. He was discharged. He initiated an employment arbitration alleging wrongful discharge. The arbitrator found the plaintiff employee had deliberately spoiled evidence by removing the hard drive of his employer-owned laptop computer before returning it to the employer and dismissed the action. The Circuit Court ruled the parties’ arbitration agreement intended the arbitrator could exercise the same powers as a judge and found no basis for disturbing the arbitrator’s award. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court’s confirmation of the award. The Court of Appeals indicated plaintiff was placed on notice that a discovery sanction was sought, was afforded ample opportunity to submit evidence on his own behalf, and no due process violation occurred.

The Common Law of the Workplace (2d ed., St. Antoine)


The Common Law of the Workplace has helpful discussions concerning adverse inferences. The Common Law of the Workplace indicates the following concerning adverse inferences.
§ 1.14. Subpoenas

Arbitrators, the AAA under its rules, and, in some jurisdictions, attorneys can sign subpoenas for persons and things to demand their presence at the arbitration hearing.

Comment:

... If subpoenaed material is not turned over by a party, or if a subpoenaed witness controlled by a party-such as a supervisor or management official-does not appear, the other party can either enforce the subpoena in court or ask the arbitrator to draw adverse inferences against the offending party. … Id. at pp. 12-13. Emphasis in original.

§ 1.45. Nonappearance of Subpoenaed Witnesses

Comment:


... [I]f the witness is within the control of a party, an alternative method of “enforcing” a subpoena is to ask the arbitrator to draw adverse inferences against the party that did not bring the witness after it is proven a subpoena was properly served. Id. at p. 30. Emphasis in original.

Abrams, Inside Arbitration (2013)


Inside Arbitration reviews adverse inference issues in labor arbitration and states:

If a witness refuses to answer a proper question, a party can ask the arbitrator to direct the witness to answer. The arbitrator cannot order the witness to answer and hold him or her in contempt for not answering, as would a trial judge. If the witness still refuses to answer, the arbitrator properly presumes that the testimony would not have been favorable to the party who called the person as a witness. Id., p. 139. ...

... If the missing witness appears to the arbitrator to have played a critical role in the events raised in the grievance, the neutral will draw a negative inference that the missing witness would not have testified in support of the claim. Id., p. 147. ...

... [A]rbitrators will generally draw an adverse inference from the fact that the grievant does not offer his or her side of the story directly to the arbitrator. That does not mean that management must prevail if the grievant does not testify. It means, rather, that an arbitrator expects to hear from the accused party. … Id., p. 215. Emphasis added.

Nolan, Labor and Employment Arbitration (1998)


Labor and Employment Arbitration contains a helpful discussion concerning adverse inferences. Id., p. 225-226. Nolan indicates, in part:

As a practical matter, arbitrators cannot force a reluctant employee to testify. They may issue a subpoena but enforcing a subpoena requires court action. Arbitrators can and frequently do draw adverse conclusions from a failure to testify  … . Id., p. 225.

... Most arbitrators do draw negative inferences... . They are particularly likely to do so when the reluctant employee faces no risk of a subsequent criminal proceeding.  … Id.

Conclusion


The use of adverse inferences is alive and well in labor arbitration. Adverse inference issues can arise from failure to call a relevant witness, produce relevant documentation, silence, or the destruction of evidence.
————————
Lee Hornberger is a member of the National Academy of Arbitrators. He is a former chair of the State Bar’s ADR Section, Editor Emeritus of The Michigan Dispute Resolution Journal, a former member of the SBM’s Representative Assembly, a former president of the Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Antrim Bar Association, and a former chair of the Traverse City Human Rights Commission. He is a member of the Professional Resolution Experts of Michigan, and a Diplomate Member of The National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals. He has received the Distinguished Service Award, the George Bashara Award, and Hero of ADR Awards from the SBM ADR Section.

COMMENTARY: His election resume begs a multitude of questions

November 01 ,2024

Objective: To again become the leader of the world and get even with all those who have charged me with crimes and criticized me politically. Also, want to build on the summary outlined below.
:  
By Berl Falbaum

Resume (Abridged)
Donald J. Trump
Mar-a-Lago Club
1100 S. Ocean Blvd.
Palm Beach, Florida
Phone (redacted)
Email (redacted)

Objective: To again become the leader of the world and get even with all those who have charged me with crimes and criticized me politically. Also, want to build on the summary outlined below.

Before becoming Presidential Candidate in 2015


—The Trump Organization was involved in more than 3,500 lawsuits.

—Was accused of sexual assaults by more than two-dozen women.

—Was the subject of continued coverage on numerous sexual and other exploits in New York’s tabloids. Had several adulteress affairs.

—Led the Trump organization into four bankruptcies. Failures in other business as well.

— Agreed to a $25 million settlement to resolve three lawsuits which charged students who enrolled in Trump University we misled.

—Received four questionable deferments for alleged ankle bone spurs, thus avoiding call up during the Vietnam War.

—Was sued by the Justice Department for banning Blacks from Trump property in Florida.

—Said the late Senator John McCain, who spent more than five years as a POW in North Vietnam, was not a hero because he was captured. Also, called McCain a “loser.”

—Frequently referred to some women as “pigs,” “slobs,” and “ugly.”

Presidential Candidate June 2015-November 2016


—Told first lie as a candidate by bragging about the size of the crowd at announcement to run for president. Claimed thousands; there were a couple hundred organized by PR team.

—Would not condemn the KKK.

—Mocked a disabled reporter.

—Publicly discussed daughter, Ivanka, in unsettling sexual terms.

—Boasted about grabbing women by their p____.

—Distributed antisemitic campaign literature featuring Hillary Clinton and aired antisemitic TV ads.

U.S. President, 2017-21


—Was impeached twice, the first in U.S. history to be charged twice.

—Told more than 16,000 provable lies all published by The Washington Post in the book: “Donald Trump and His Assault on Truth.”

—Alienated numerous U.S. allies, including members of NATO and the UN.

—Sided with Russian President Vladimir Putin against U.S. intelligence agencies.

—Incited an insurrection on the Capitol in which nine people died and 150 police officers were injured. Refused to call it off for more than three hours.

—Called the insurrectionists “patriots;” if re-elected, would pardon those in prison and called the riot a “day of love.”

—Supported the rioters’ call for hanging Vice President Mike Pence.

—Said white supremacists who protested in Charlottesville, Virginia that “Jews will not replace us,” included some “very fine people.”

—Believed that George Washington won the Revolutionary War because he captured the airports, and that Frederick Douglass, the famous Black abolitionist and orator in the mid-1800s, was still alive.

—Called African countries “sh__hole” nations.

—Refused to denounce QAnon.

—Suggested injecting disinfectants to fight COVID.

—Continually praised dictators around the world.

—As commander-in-chief, labeled fallen U.S. soldiers “losers” while visiting a cemetery in Paris.

—When leaving office for Mar-a-Lago, took numerous secret records which belonged in the National Archives, and refused to return them, thereby violating the Presidential Records act.

Out of Office & CEO, Trump Organization, 2021-24


—For four years, continued to lie about the 2020 election by claiming victory.

—Launched several schemes to overturn the election.

—Was found guilty of 24 felony charges for falsifying business records and will be sentenced November 26, 2024. The case involved $130,000 in hush money paid to a porn actress.

—Was fined $465 million for real estate fraud.

—Continued to lie in every interview and at rallies.

—Was found guilty of sexual assault in two civil trials and fined $88 million.

—Facing charges in three other major cases which are expected to go to trial in 2025 unless lawyers can win further delays.

—Six Trump officials went to prison for a variety of offenses, some others were Indicted and have cases pending while several were pardoned.

—Embraced white supremacists; inviting leaders to dinner at Mar-a- Lago.

Staffing in Next Administration


Plan to bring back Bannon, Manafort, Navarro and Papadopoulos. They have all completed their prison sentences. Then there is Giuliani who has been indicted in Arizona and may be available and, of course, Roger Stone, who was pardoned after he was sentenced to 40 months in prison. Given his experience and knowledge of the criminal world, he would make a great FBI Director.

Flynn is a possibility for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I pardoned him before he was sentenced for lying to the FBI. I like his warning that “the gates of Hell” will be unleashed if re-elected.

Still thinking about Marjorie Taylor Greene for Secretary of State or National Security Advisor. I definitely will have her in my administration. Maybe I will use her diplomatic skills at the U.N.

Also considering “My Pillow Guy,” (Michael James Lindell) to head the Small Business Administration. He furnished bedding for Mar-a-Lago, so I owe him.

References

—Trump is “America’s Hitler” and an “idiot”, J.D. Vance, vice presidential candidate.

—“I cannot in good conscience endorse Donald Trump,” Vice President, Mike Pence, 2017-2021.

—Donald Trump “should go to Hell,” Republican Senator Lindsey O. Graham.

—Trump is a “sniveling coward,” “utterly immoral,” “a serial philanderer,” Republican Senator from Texas, Ted Cruz.

—Electing Donald Trump would be like committing suicide for the country, former Republican South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley.

—Trump is a “f____ing moron,” Trump’s former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

—Donald Trump is a “cancer,” former Republican Governor of Texas, Rick Perry.

More references available upon request.

I am available for interviews as long as I am permitted to take the Fifth and bring two lawyers. In one deposition, took the Fifth 450 times which I am proud to say is a world record.

This is an abridged resume and I stress “abridged” because there is so much more to boast about. But this summary indicates, as I said in a TV interview, “I’m basically a truthful person.”

This is the greatest resume in U.S. history.
*****
Question to Trump supporters: So, would you hire this man for your business or want him in your family?
————————
Berl Falbaum is a veteran journalist and author of 12 books.

THE EXPERT WITNESS: Playing loose with real estate and IFCs, part one

October 25 ,2024

Preluding courses that focus on Real Estate, Mortgages, and other related topics, was life around the dinner table at home. My father had entered the realm of Real Estate in the late 1920s/early 1930s. My stepmom had worked Burton Abstract and Title for decades. Before studying Real Estate Economics, I absorbed the knowledge that my parents shared with me.
:  
By John F. Sase

Preluding courses that focus on Real Estate, Mortgages, and other related topics, was life around the dinner table at home. My father had entered the realm of Real Estate in the late 1920s/early 1930s. My stepmom had worked Burton Abstract and Title for decades. Before studying Real Estate Economics, I absorbed the knowledge that my parents shared with me.

Real Estate trends repeat themselves every couple of decades. Prices of homes and business buildings go up! Then, those prices go down. Eventually, the prices of homes and business buildings go back up as the cycle repeats itself. Most Real Estate brokers tend to remain honest and treat their clients with respect. These brokers value their clients in part because they may be their neighbors and repeat customers in the future.

However, some brokers and their sales staff remain unconcerned with current markets as they believe in a philosophy of “get rich quick” and then move on to other income generating shenanigans.

Whenever times get tough in this business, it seems that more and more con artists promising castles in the air emerge from the woodwork. Many of us citizens, looking for alternatives to the failed opportunities of “Flipping Real Estate,” along with other touts that populate late-night infomercials, have received e-mails tempting the market with both new and old schemes. Nowadays, we hit our Delete keys and move on.

However, the relevance of this e-mail was brought home to me (Dr. Sase) by Bryan Lagalo, a Doctoral Candidate in the Economics Department of Wayne State University. He shared a well-conceived presentation in my class on Financial Economics. He titled his PowerPoint presentation for this class, “Charles Ponzi: The Life of an Infamous Schemer.” Bryan informed a small group of academics about Ponzi, an Italian flimflam man who duped thousands of Americans during the early twentieth century in what now has become known as “the Ponzi Scheme.” Seeing Bryan’s presentation made me stop and think about the parallels that exist between the scams of yesteryear and those repeated today. So, when I read the Scam Mail quoted in Bryans paper, I thought to myself, “It’s the ghost of Ponzi!”

Before watching Bryan’s presentation, I knew as much about Ponzi as the average investor—virtually nothing more than I could express in a single paragraph. However, that has changed since watching Bryan’s PowerPoint show. His audience fought to hold back the laughter of disbelief over a con artist whom I can describe only as a completely amoral sociopath. With the assistance of Contributing Editor Gerard J. Senick and myself, Bryan chronicles Ponzi and his scheme, one which made the Ponzi name synonymous with fraudulent and unsustainable investment scams.  

“Aaay! It’s the Ponz!”

(With Apologies to Arthur Herbert Fonzarelli, AKA “the Fonz”)

Over the years, the term “Ponzi Scheme” has evolved into our byword for any act in which financial-market manipulators swindle trusting investors out of billions of dollars in assorted (and sordid) pyramid schemes.

The term continues to appear regularly in the Wall Street Journal and related publications that circulate widely throughout the current political arena and the popular press. The name of Ponzi has spread so profusely that a Google search of the single word “Ponzi” generates over 203,000 hits this week. Our search provided us with the definition from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). It states, “Decades later, the Ponzi scheme continues to work on the ‘rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul’ principle, as money from new investors is used to pay off earlier investors until the whole scheme collapses.” (“Ponzi Schemes”, US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Born in Lugo, Italy, in 1882, Ponzi said that he came from an upper-class family, (though he had a propensity for changing the facts of his life). He attended the University of Rome La Sapienza, but dedicated his time mostly to bars, cafes, and the opera. At the age of twenty-seven, Ponzi immigrated to the United Sates.

Having gambled away his life savings during his passage to America, he arrived in Boston with little but his name. In the Smithsonian magazine, (“In Ponzi We Trust,” December 1998), Mary Darby quotes the “Ponz” as stating that he “landed in this United States with $2.50 in cash and $1 million in hopes, and those hopes never left me.”

Ponzi learned English while working at odd jobs along the Eastern Seaboard. However, after being fired as a waiter for stealing from and shortchanging customers, he decided to move to Montreal, Canada. There, Ponzi took a job as an assistant teller at the newly opened Banco Zarossi, (a bank started by Luigi Zarossi to accommodate the growing number of Italians who had immigrated to Canada). Zarossi offered 6% interest on deposits--doubling the average rate offered by competing banks at that time.

Eventually, Ponzi, who then managed the growing bank, discovered that Zarossi offered high rates simply to attract large deposits that he used to cover interest payments on poorly made Real-Estate Loans (sound familiar?) Fleeing to Mexico, Zarossi took much of the bank’s money with him.

On the plus side after the failure of Banco Zarossi, Ponzi lived at Zarossi’s home and tried to help his family. However, jobless and broke, Ponzi forged a check for $423.58 that he made out to himself, though from the director of a company who had banked with Zarossi. However, after presenting this check for payment, Montreal police arrested Ponzi. Serving three years while in a Quebec prison, Ponzi contrived a cover-up story in a letter to his mother, explaining that he was working as a “special assistant” to the prison warden. However, Mama Ponzi eventually discovered the truth.

Following his release in 1911, Ponzi returned to the United States. However, merely ten days after leaving the Canadian prison, Ponzi was arrested for smuggling Italian immigrants across the border from Canada. Ponzi then spent two more years of incarceration in the Atlanta Prison in Georgia where he worked as a translator for this warden, who was intercepting letters from Italian mobster Iganzio Saietta, known as “Lupo the Wolf.”

After serving his time, Ponzi moved to Boston. There, he met Rose Maria Gnecco, a stenographer. When Ponzi neglected to tell Gnecco about his time behind bars, Ponzi’s mother sent the young woman a letter describing the Ponzi matter in its entirety. Nevertheless, Gnecco married Ponzi in 1918 despite this shared information. Ponzi then worked at various jobs before developing an idea that resembled the present-day Yellow Pages. However, his company attempted to sell advertising space in a circulated catalog that listed various businesses--an idea did not catch on as the company failed soon after.

Prelude to the Famous Ponzi Scheme


In August 1919, Ponzi’s fortunes began to change when he received a letter from a company in Spain inquiring about his failed catalog idea. This letter contained an International Reply Coupon (IRC), a form that allows a person in one country to send prepaid postage for a reply to someone in another country.

Although Ponzi received an IRC priced in pesetas (the Spanish currency of the time), the U.S. Post Office exchanged IRCs for postage priced in stronger U.S. dollars. By the end of World War I, more than sixty countries accepted IRCs and agreed upon regulated postage-exchange rates that reflected the current rate of currency exchange.  However, many European countries experienced high levels of inflation at the turn of the decade.

As a result, currencies from countries like Spain and Italy suffered significant devaluation relative to the dollar, though the IRC postage-exchange rates remained the same.

Furthermore, the IRC discrepancy provided Ponzi with an opportunity for arbitrage. Therefore, he developed his simple plan:  He enlisted family and friends in Italy to buy the cheap IRCs and send them to him in the United States. Here, he would convert and redeem them to US dollars, a post-war currency of significantly higher value. In turn, Ponzi boasted that his net returns easily exceeded 400%, even after transaction costs.

Nothing in his plan was illegal, at least not technically.

Next, Ponzi borrowed money and sent it to his relatives in Italy, whom he asked to send back in the form of as many IRCs possible. Subsequently, Ponzi sold his arbitrage idea to several friends in Boston, promising that he would provide a 100% return in only ninety days. Ponzi used the funds that he collected to start a company that he registered as the Securities Exchange Company (SEC). (Ironically, his company shared its acronym with the Securities and Exchange Commission founded by the Federal Government a decade and a half later).

Originally, Ponzi limited his issue to notes bearing small principal amounts such as $50, $100, and $1000.  However, once his business accelerated, he left a blank line on these notes to allow investors to enter whatever amount they wanted to invest. Through this new company, Ponzi offered investors a 50% return after forty-five days or a 100% return after ninety days on virtually any principal amount.

This offer encouraged a Federal postal inspector to visit Ponzi at his business. The inspector voiced the concern that selling millions of IRCs was not legal. In retort, Ponzi explained that the IRC coupons always could be exchanged in other countries outside of the jurisdiction of the US Post Office.

Though it looked great on the surface, Ponzi’s initial investment scheme did contain substantial holes. For example, in 1920, the nations that accepted IRCs announced new postal exchange rates reflecting a large devaluation in their currencies. Furthermore, the U.S. Post Office limited its issues of IRCs to ten per visit.

Due to the immense volume of IRCs needed per transaction to ensure a profit, the transaction costs eliminated any significant arbitrage profit. Because of these impediments, Ponzi would likely have realized that transporting, unloading, and redeeming the needed volume of IRCs at a post office would prove to be prohibitive. Furthermore, his confiscated business records indicate that he purchased only a small number of these IRCs.

Fortunately for Ponzi, most people had not used an IRC or knew much about them. This public ignorance masked the fundamental problems involved with IRC arbitrage. Therefore, investors quickly flocked into Ponzi’s office.
————————
Dr. John F. Sase teaches Economics at Wayne State University and has practiced Forensic and Investigative Economics for twenty years. He earned a combined M.A. in Economics and an MBA at the University of Detroit, followed by a Ph.D. in Economics from Wayne State University. He is a graduate of the University of Detroit Jesuit High School (www.saseassociates.com).

Legal People ...

October 25 ,2024

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently made the following appointments:
:  
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently made the following appointments:

—Military Appeals Tribunal

Robert Gardella
is an attorney at law at Robert C. Gardella PLLC. He is a former member of State Bar of Michigan Board of Commissioners and the former chairperson of the State Bar of Michigan Representative Assembly. He earned a Bachelor of Arts in journalism from Michigan State University and a law degree from Cooley Law School.

Garella is reappointed as a civilian licensed to practice law in this state for a term commencing October 10, 2024, and expiring April 16, 2027.    

The Military Appeals Tribunal has appellate jurisdiction, upon petition of an accused, to hear and review the record in all decisions of a court-martial after the review provided in the Michigan code of military justice.  
This appointment is subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.

—Statewide Housing Partnership

Brad Ward
is currently the vice president of public policy and legal affairs for the Michigan Realtors Association. He previously held a position at the Michigan House of Representatives as a legislative aid to Representative Nancy Cassis. He is a member of the National Association of Realtors Government Affairs Director Advisory Board, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce Tax Policy Committee, and the John Drypen Foundation. He earned a Bachelor of Arts in political theory and constitutional democracy from Michigan State University and his law degree from Wayne State University Law School.

Ward is reappointed to represent development associations or organizations, which might include organizations representing realtors, builders, and planners, for a term commencing October 10, 2024, and expiring September 30, 2027.

The Statewide Housing Partnership serves as an advisory body within the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. Members include leaders from state, local, and tribal governments, advocates from nonprofit and community organizations, and representatives from the business advocacy world and finance industry.    

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

—Michigan Wildlife Council

Daniel Cooke is the founder and chief executive officer of Expedition Detroit LLC and the principal attorney of Daniel Cooke Law PLLC. He earned a Bachelor of Arts in international relations from Michigan State University and received his law degree from Wayne State University Law School.

Cooke is appointed as an individual with a media or marketing background, who is not an employee of the department, for a term commencing October 10, 2024, and expiring March 31, 2026. He succeeds Thomas Elliot Shafer, who has resigned.     

The Michigan Wildlife Council was created to educate about the importance of wildlife conservation and the role of hunters and anglers in preserving Michigan’s great outdoor heritage for future generations.

This appointment is subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.

•          •           •

Kotz Sangster Wysocki PC
has announced that attorney Douglas Eyre has joined the firm in its Detroit office. Eyre brings more than 20 years of experience in construction law and commercial litigation to the firm. He plans to continue practicing in these two areas at Kotz Sangster, strengthening the firm’s business law practice.

“I’ve spent my career expanding and refining my legal specialties to where they are today, and I’m eager to bring that expertise to my new role with Kotz Sangster,” Eyre said. “I’m excited to take the next steps of my career as part of this talented team.”

Eyre brings experience both in-house and in private practice emphasizing construction law, real estate law, and commercial litigation, most recently as a partner at a boutique construction law firm. He currently serves as a chair on the American Bar Association Business Law Section’s in-house litigation subcommittee.

Eyre earned his B.A. in Political Science from Western Michigan University and his law degree from Michigan State University College of Law. He was also recognized by DBusiness Magazine as a Top Lawyer in Construction Law.

•          •           •

Foley, Baron, Metzger, & Juip PLLC
(FBMJ) is pleased to announce that Silvia Alexandria Mansoor has been elevated to chair of the State Bar of Michigan Young Lawyers Section.

As the chair, Mansoor also maintains her seat with the State Bar of Michigan (SBM) Board of Commissioners.

“I’m excited to serve in this role and represent the Young Lawyers Section. I look forward to a great year ahead working on behalf of my peers,” Mansoor said after assuming her new position during the Section’s annual meeting.

Founded in 1940, the Young Lawyers Section is the oldest and one of the largest sections of the State Bar of Michigan. It is comprised of three districts that represent the entirety of the state’s young lawyers. The section regularly carries out legal and public-facing events and provides a great environment to develop leadership within the Michigan legal community. Mansoor has been an active member of the section since 2017.

As a senior associate attorney with the firm, Mansoor defends health care professionals and organizations in complex medical malpractice claims and business dispute claims.

•          •           •

Foster, Swift, Collins, & Smith PC
welcomes litigator Lino A. Taormina to the firm’s Southfield office. Having practiced in Southeast Michigan for more than five years, Taormina primarily represents insurance carriers in first-party no-fault suits, third-party auto negligence suits, and insurance coverage disputes.

His litigation experience also includes Construction defect suits, Premises liability suits, and     large loss pre-suit investigations, along with a variety of tort and contract litigation.

Taormina received his law degree from the University of Toledo College of Law in 2019. While attending law school, he served as law clerk to 38th Circuit Court Judge Daniel S. White.  Prior to that, he received his B.S. degree in Accounting from Adrian College.

•          •           •

Bush Seyferth PLLC
is proud to announce the promotion of two new partners: Lena Gonzalez and Ryan Vanderford.

Gonzalez has been with the firm since 2018. She litigates complex commercial and insurance coverage cases in both federal and state courts, representing clients ranging from global manufacturing companies to private individuals. She handles disputes involving commercial contracts, including complex breach of contract and breach of warranty cases, as well as tort defense.

In her insurance coverage practice, Gonzalez represents national insurers in life and auto-insurance no-fault matters. She has served as lead counsel for a national insurance company in defense of false representation claims and for a national manufacturer in breach of contract, breach of warranty, and specific performance cases.

In addition to her practice, Gonzalez serves as BSP Law’s Professional Development & Diversity director. She received her law degree from Wayne State University Law School in 2016.

Vanderford joined the firm in 2021. He focuses his practice representing manufacturers in high-stakes product liability litigation all across the country and also has experience in class action defense, corporate policy holder insurance recovery, mass tort litigation, and white-collar defense.

Vanderford has obtained multiple favorable settlements and dismissals for major automotive manufacturers in high-exposure product liability actions, including cases involving fatalities, traumatic brain injury, and other significant bodily injuries.

In addition to his practice, Vanderford serves as a member of BSP Law’s Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Committee and participates in the firm’s recruiting efforts. He received his law degree from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law in 2015, and his B.A. from the University of Colorado, Boulder in 2012.

•          •           •

Honigman
is proud to announce that the firm has achieved Mansfield Certification for 2023-2024. Honigman is among more than 360 leading law firms that participated in this year’s Mansfield Certification process.

“We are thrilled to achieve Mansfield Certification for 2023-2024, a milestone that reflects our commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion within our firm,” said David Foltyn, chair and CEO of Honigman. “This certification not only recognizes our efforts but also motivates us to continue building a workplace that values diverse perspectives and experiences, ultimately better serving our clients and communities.”

•          •           •

Dykema
recently announced the addition of Alison Furtaw as a senior counsel in its Government Investigations and Corporate Compliance Practice in the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office. Furtaw joins Dykema after serving as assistant U.S. attorney for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Eastern District of Michigan for three years. Prior to that, she spent more than a decade serving as assistant attorney general for the Michigan Department of Attorney General.

As a former assistant U.S. attorney and state assistant attorney general, Furtaw has experience handling matters at the federal, state, and local levels. During her tenure as an assistant United States attorney in the Eastern District of Michigan, she investigated and prosecuted several complex federal criminal violations. Furtaw has experience serving the Healthcare Fraud Unit in Detroit. She also has regulatory experience from her 12 years of experience working with the Michigan Attorney General’s Office. During her time with the Michigan AG, she prosecuted hundreds of white collar criminal cases and created a position as a cybercrime specialist—prosecuting complicated computer crimes, including a national computer-based Ponzi scheme.

Furtaw’s practice focuses on complex criminal, regulatory, and civil matters, including representing healthcare professionals with licensing issues, issues with the Michigan Attorney General’s Office, or billing issues related to Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) investigations.

Before her government service, Furtaw spent seven years in private practice running her own criminal defense practice law firm.

Furtaw earned a law degree from the Detroit College of Law and a B.A. in Communications from Oakland University.

•          •           •

Taft
’s Paytech and Payment Systems chair Nicole Meisner will speak on three separate panels at the upcoming Electronic Transactions Association (ETA) Payments Compliance Conference. The conference will take place in Pentagon City, Virginia, from Oct. 29 to 30.

This two-day conference will provide vital insight and programming from industry visionaries and regulatory leaders to help navigate the complex regulatory landscape.

Meisner, of Taft’s Detroit-Southfield office, counsels a range of companies in the payments and financial services industries, including acquiring banks, payment processors, independent sales organizations (ISOs), payment facilitators, marketplaces, mobile payment providers, financial technology (FinTech) companies, ACH providers, money transmitters, prepaid access providers, and digital currency companies.

A large segment of Meisner’s client base includes software platforms and other SaaS providers that have embedded or integrated payment processing solutions into their core offering.

•          •           •

Brooks Kushman
attorneys Hope Shovein and Erica Klazmer hosted and International Trademark Association (INTA) Roundtable, “Enforcement: AI and Fair Use,” on October 21.  This lunch-and-learn session discussed the important questions surrounding IP ownership in AI.

With more than 20 years of IP experience, Shovein manages trademark portfolios and develops IP strategies, including clearance, prosecution, enforcement, and everything in between, for both domestic and multinational companies. She also counsels on brand protection programs utilizing investigations, demand letters, online and social media platform takedowns, domain name complaints, as well as Trademark Trial and Appeal Board proceedings. She specializes in helping clients enforce their rights in any medium, including the unauthorized use of trademarks and copyright-protected material on the internet.

Shovein is a past chair of both the State Bar of Michigan (SBM) Intellectual Property Law Section and also the Young Lawyers Section. She served as a commissioner on the SBM Board of Commissioners. She has been named to World Trademark Review’s “WTR 1000” since 2018.

Klazmer focuses her practice on trademark clearance, prosecution, enforcement, counseling, and portfolio management. She has experience counseling clients in a wide variety of industries, including technology, finance, food and beverage, fashion, consumer products, entertainment, and gaming.

In addition to managing and growing trademark portfolios both domestically and internationally, Klazmer litigates trademark oppositions and cancellations before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and counsels clients on copyright matters. Her transactional intellectual property (IP) experience includes trademark coexistence and consent agreements, as well as trademark and copyright assignment and licensing agreements.

COMMENTARY: How to tell if the election was ‘rigged’... or not

October 25 ,2024

There is much concern over whether the upcoming presidential election will be “rigged” against one candidate, or another.  Based on Michigan election law, MCL 168.1-168.992 and my 16 years working as an election inspector, here is how you can have a meaningful sense of whether or not the election was, or could have been, “rigged,” such that your candidate might have been wrongly deprived of victory.
:  
By Scott E. Munzel

There is much concern over whether the upcoming presidential election will be “rigged” against one candidate, or another.  Based on Michigan election law, MCL 168.1-168.992 and my 16 years working as an election inspector, here is how you can have a meaningful sense of whether or not the election was, or could have been, “rigged,” such that your candidate might have been wrongly deprived of victory.

Elections are run by the clerks of cities and townships across Michigan. As such, the results for statewide elections, such as the presidential election, are the sum of the results from the 1,521 jurisdictions that run the elections. This diffused management makes it extremely difficult to engage in any large-scale “rigging.”

Crucially, the clerks who run the elections hire “election inspectors” to do the actual work of putting on the elections. Most of these election inspectors live in the city or township where the election is occurring. That is, the folks you see working the polls and who help you vote are your neighbors, typically civic-minded residents who simply want to help self-government function.  Each election inspector takes an oath to uphold the U.S. and Michigan Constitutions and perform their duties according to the Michigan election law. MCL 168.680. In this way, elections are similar to juries: conducted by regular folks who, in a quiet yet remarkable way, contribute to the success of what Abraham Lincoln called our “experiment in democracy.”

Very importantly, state law requires that the clerks hire individuals from both of the major parties, and have them working together to complete every single task involved in the election. MCL 168.674. As such, there are mutual “foxes watching the chicken coop,” in real time, throughout the entire election process. So, while the election in which you voted could have been “rigged,” that would mean that multiple members of your party working at the precinct or absent voter count board let the other party engage in some level of election fraud. This is improbable at best. In reality, in order to be sure their respective candidates are treated fairly, the two major parties have conjured a way in which bipartisanship creates an election process with a high degree of integrity.

Moreover, every aspect of the electoral process is open to the public. This applies to the testing of the tabulators, review of the lists of voters, the voting process at the precincts and absent voter count boards, and the review of the election results as they are tabulated and then accumulated by the local clerk. Because of this transparency, it would be very difficult to engage in large-scale fraud.  If it did occur, it was because your candidate or party failed to observe and keep an eye on the very public election process. If your party was “on the job,” you can feel confident that the election was not “rigged.”

Other mechanics of the actual voting process impact whether or not the election was “rigged.”  As noted above, the tabulators are all tested in public ahead of the election to be sure they have no programming glitches that might improperly allocate the voted ballots. They are then sealed until the morning of the election, when election inspectors unseal them. The tabulators are not connected to the internet; they are “stand alone,” so that they cannot be manipulated from afar.

There are strict controls on the actual ballots. Every ballot is numbered, and they are all accounted for throughout the entire election process. All the ballots used must match the number of voters, as well as the numbers in the tabulators. All of the ballots and other election materials are sealed at the end of the day, again by election inspectors of different political parties, to maintain the integrity of the ballots and the other election materials. The ballots are retained after the election in case of a recount or other irregularities that need to be investigated. Because of the bipartisan oversight of the ballots, “rigging” of the voted ballots is almost impossible.

Finally, the actual voters. To register to vote, an applicant must be a U.S. citizen and a resident of the city or township in which they seek to register, and must provide information to the clerk that is checked by the state for accuracy. The application to register to vote must contain a signature. To obtain an absent voter ballot, the signature of the applicant must match the signature of the registered voter. While conceivably not fool-proof, it would be very difficult to engineer any kind of large-scale fraud in the absent voter process. And to vote at the polls in person, the applicant must present photographic identification or swear that they have such identification. Again, it would be very difficult to engage in large-scale fraud in the in-person voting process.

In truth, the two major parties have enacted comprehensive legislation governing how elections in Michigan are conducted, and have designed a system that is transparent, with built-in protections that create a system with a high degree of accuracy and integrity. If election fraud does in fact occur, it is in the best interests of everyone to know about it and determine how to move forward, particularly given that election results could be adjusted based on the discovery of real fraud. But without presenting actual evidence, claims that an election was “rigged” are no more than gossip; an insult to the thousands of election inspectors who work to deliver election results in which all valid votes are counted; damage the legitimacy of every candidate on the ballot; and undermine our shared system of self-government.
————————
Scott E. Munzel is Of Counsel to Dever Eby Issa PLLC in Ann Arbor. He practices municipal law and real estate law, and related litigation. He has worked as an election inspector for the City of Ann Arbor since 2008, both at the precinct polls and at absent voter count boards.