Columns

A new federal rule prohibiting companies from requiring noncompete agreements from employees may wind up reducing their use even if the rule is overturned, Professor J.J. Prescott says.

By Bob Needham
Michigan Law

A new federal rule prohibiting companies from requiring noncompete agreements from employees may wind up reducing their use even if the rule is overturned, Professor J.J. Prescott says.

The agreements—in which the employee agrees not to go to work for a competitor or start their own business if they leave their employer—have become commonplace in recent years. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), relying substantially on Prescott’s research, estimates that 20 percent of U.S. workers are subject to one. Under the new FTC rule, employers, in most cases, may no longer use the agreements—although court challenges to the rule are already in the works.

Prescott, the Henry King Ransom Professor of Law, has done considerable research into noncompete agreements, and the FTC extensively cited the work of Prescott and his co-authors in first proposing the new rule. Prescott—who is also co-director of the Michigan’s Empirical Legal Studies Center and co-director of the Program in Law and Economics—recently answered five questions about the issue:

1. Your research has highlighted just how prevalent noncompete agreements are—even, somewhat surprisingly, in lower-paid, lower-skill jobs. Where are they most common?

They are common in virtually all fields of employment. Although they are most prevalent where you might expect—higher-paying jobs with access to confidential information—our study found less variation between types of jobs than I believe most people would have predicted.

I personally expected to find very few noncompetes binding low-wage workers because such agreements seem likely to be more trouble than they’re worth for employers. Yet in many fast-food, seasonal, or similar types of jobs, instead of just showing up and punching a timecard, you’re now likely to find you have a bunch of paperwork to sign and an employee handbook to review on your first day. Both may contain a noncompete that you feel locked into signing.

I also expected to find that in certain high-end positions, where people have received significant training and have access to client lists, trade secrets, and other kinds of proprietary information, noncompetes would be nearly universal. But noncompetes appear to be less common in high-earning and technical fields than I would have predicted. Even so, the more technical, the more professional, the higher-paid your job, the more likely you are to be asked to sign a noncompete. In certain occupations and industries, you’re two or three times as likely to have one.

2. Do workers tend to object to, or at least to negotiate, noncompete agreements?

In the Journal of Law and Economics, my co-authors and I present evidence on this question. If noncompetes are a constraint on employee mobility, we would expect workers to demand something in return for signing one. Yet we don’t really see a lot of that, on average, at least if the employee is asked to sign a noncompete after they have already accepted their job.

We also find in our survey work that very few people negotiate over noncompetes. Apparently that’s because they do not believe that refusing to agree is a realistic option and they worry that negotiating over a noncompete sends a negative message to their new employer that might harm their career.

At the same time, if you are made aware that you will be asked to sign a noncompete before you accept a job, you’re more likely to receive training and have higher wages—which suggests that having outside options at the time a noncompete is contemplated matters to an employee’s experience at that employer. Yet a lot of people do not receive notice that they will be asked to sign a noncompete in advance. They basically find out about it on day one. So you turn down all your other job offers and then show up on the first day, and the noncompete is in that bunch of papers that you have to sign. Not surprisingly, many people in that situation believe that they can’t say no and that negotiation is a nonstarter.

3. Are there issues with enforcing noncompete agreements?

Historically, noncompetes have been governed by state law. In some jurisdictions, like California, noncompetes are unenforceable in court, but they still appear regularly in employee contracts.

This is surprising but part of a larger pattern. Research over the last 10 years has shown that in the context of leases, consumer contracts, and other domains, contract drafters often include provisions that they know are invalid—because the employee, renter, consumer, etc., does not know they are invalid and assumes, reasonably in my view, that if a provision appears in a contract, it must be something that can be enforced. In the case of leases, if even a small fraction of a landlord’s tenants adhere to invalid provisions that benefit the landlord, it’s probably worth it for landlords to include them.

Our latest paper, which is forthcoming in the Journal of Legal Studies, examines beliefs about the enforceability of noncompete agreements. Most people believe that noncompetes are enforceable, even when they are not.

If you’re in California, for example, where noncompetes have been unenforceable for more than a century, most employees still believe that they are enforceable. When people trust that
language in contracts is lawful, there is real potential for abuse by contract drafters.

We also asked people with noncompetes whether they would consider leaving their job and under what conditions. We find that even where noncompetes can’t be enforced, and even when we inform them that noncompetes are unenforceable in their jurisdiction, some people still report that their noncompete would matter to their decision to leave their employer. What we don’t know yet is why. You might comply with a noncompete because you feel like it’s a contract and it could be enforced against you, but you might also comply simply because you feel like you made a promise or because your reputation might suffer if you leave after “agreeing” not to compete.

4. Assuming that the new FTC rule holds up as it’s currently written, how broad are the effects likely to be?

The new rule has received a lot of attention, and if the courts conclude that the rule is valid, many companies will of course simply drop noncompete provisions from their employment contracts. Employers also are required to inform people who are currently bound by noncompetes that their noncompete is no longer enforceable. My guess is that the rule is going to make a pretty big difference for a lot of individuals in the economy. That said, employers are still invited to use “alternatives,” like confidentiality agreements, to protect legitimate employer interests, and innovation in the use of other types of provisions may wind up limiting the impact of the rule.

On a broader scale, one of the main takeaways of the academic literature is just a simple fact about employment contracting: Low-wage noncompetes exist even though they don’t seem to make a lot of sense, and even when the chances that an employer would sue to enforce a noncompete are very small. One very credible explanation in the low-wage setting is that noncompetes can retard wage growth by preventing people from moving to other, similar jobs where somebody is willing to pay them a higher wage. Indeed, this sort of mobility is one of the main sources of wage growth in the economy. The FTC’s rule may make it harder for employers to inhibit mobility among those in the lower part of the income distribution.

Importantly, even if the rule is ultimately overturned in court, the conversation and the rule itself may still change behavior. Employees are more likely to be aware of noncompetes and their effects. The FTC’s defense of the rule and its assembling of evidence for why noncompetes are, on balance, bad for competition might make some companies rethink how they approach post-employment covenants. Or companies may think they are at great risk in the years ahead from their state banning noncompetes even if the federal government doesn’t succeed in its defense of a national ban.

5. How likely is it that the rule will be overturned?

The consensus appears to be that the rule is quite vulnerable to being overturned by the courts. My colleague Dan Crane conducted a non-scientific survey of scholars on this question, and nearly every single person (of an admittedly small pool) who responded purported to believe that the rule will be overturned in one way or another, albeit for different reasons.

The Supreme Court has been pretty critical of agency actions in recent years, and the FTC’s noncompete rule is the sort of action that has worried the courts. It’s a broad rule that applies in lots of situations to a lot of employers. It will affect tens of millions of employment relationships. For these reasons alone, it is certainly very possible that the FTC’s more-than-500-page defense of the rule will not be enough to convince the Supreme Court that the rule is valid.

Short-term rentals have become a multi-billion dollar global market in fewer than two decades. What began as a solution to give travelers more choices in their accommodations became an income stream for property owners who provide them. Airbnb, which started it all, has grown to include more than 5 million hosts worldwide.

By Jon Dulin
Wealth of Geeks

Short-term rentals have become a multi-billion dollar global market in fewer than two decades. What began as a solution to give travelers more choices in their accommodations became an income stream for property owners who provide them. Airbnb, which started it all, has grown to include more than 5 million hosts worldwide.

This put short-term rentals on the map and made investing in these properties accessible to a wider audience. People who would have likely never considered owning investment real estate now have one or even multiple properties that give them a tidy profit.

But there are catches. A person can’t purchase a property just anywhere and expect a good return. There are good areas for short-term rentals and not-so-good areas.

 Additionally, buying a property for a reasonable price and earning enough rental income to cover monthly expenses isn’t as straightforward as it sounds.

Is investing in short-term rentals a smart financial move?

Short-term rentals offer impressive potential for a pretty healthy cash flow. However, there’s more to this venture than meets the eye. Investors face certain challenges that long-term rental properties do not present.

The short-term rental market has become highly competitive, so investors must more carefully maintain properties and monitor the business end of the venture. Regulations for short-term rentals vary from state to state and even within cities and counties. New York City enacted short-term rental restrictions in 2023. Several California communities, especially in vacation heavy Los Angeles and Orange County have very specific guidelines and fees. Investors must stay abreast of their region’s regulations.

So, while short-term rentals are easier to run than other real estate investments and offer extra cash flow and tax benefits, drawbacks include higher costs due to frequent turnover and varied monthly income.

Airbnb or hotel: What do travelers say?

For centuries, hotels were the accommodation of choice for weary travelers. When Airbnb introduced the concept of short-term rentals instead of hotels, it changed how the world travels.

Today, the burgeoning short-term rental market has gone far beyond its air-mattress-on-the-floor roots. Rentals offer many accommodations ranging from palatial estates to quirky travel trailers and everything in between. They have also added categories for experiences like “castles,” “icons,” and “OMG!”

In a survey conducted by Clever Real Estate, respondents disclosed their preferred travel accommodations. In addition to standard criteria like good reviews, amenities, location, and pet policies, other requirements — affordable price (67%), privacy (45%), and layout (44%) — suggest consumers desire intimacy and value.

More and more travelers are turning to short-term rentals because they get more space and privacy at similar or cheaper rates than a hotel stay.

The best and worst markets for short-term rentals

Short-term rentals fare better in some regions than others, but research and analysis can determine the best locations. After all, it’s no use having one if it never gets rented out.
Cleveland, Ohio, Hartford, Connecticut, and Kansas City, Missouri, top the list of cities with the highest return on investment, primarily due to lower real estate costs. The cities with the lowest return on investment include San Jose, Los Angeles, San Francisco, CA, and Austin, TX, primarily because of the high home cost.

When determining if a market is good, purchase price is not the only consideration. Local attractions such as beaches, amusement parks, and skiing can boost occupancy rates. Properties near military bases or colleges are also good locations for short-term rentals.

Crowdfunding short-term rental investments

There are other options for those looking to invest in real estate but don’t have the money for a down payment or interest in running a short-term rental. One popular strategy is real estate crowdfunding, which allows companies to pool money from multiple investors to purchase and manage a property. The investor earns rental income based on their ownership percentage. When properties sell, they also gain based on their ownership percentage.

Arrived Homes is among those innovating this market segment. It offers the traditional crowdfunding approach and allows investors to fund other real estate purchases for a higher return.

The downside to using a crowdfunding platform is a person’s ownership percentage. While it is convenient to invest $500 and gain access to rental real estate, that amount of money will equal less than 1% ownership, meaning the income stream will be small. However, as an investor invests additional money, it can prove to be lucrative.

The BRRRR method: The old-fashioned way

If crowdfunding is not of any interest to an investor, the old-fashioned BRRRR method: Buy, Rehab, Rent, Refinance, and Repeat. Investors have used this time-honored technique for decades.

The investor buys the property for a discounted price, rehabs it, and rents it. Once they build up enough equity, they refinance and do it again with another property.

Additionally, investors may purchase a duplex, live in one unit, and rent out the other. The goal is for the rental income to offset most of the monthly mortgage payment. In time, the investor buys a new property to move into and rents out the previously occupied unit. Of course, the downside is finding these properties and having the money to purchase them.

To determine a suitable investment path, list the pros and cons of investing in real estate. Remove any bias and list all the advantages and drawbacks to arrive at the best decision.

This is the fourth commentary examining Niccolo Machiavelli’s analysis of challenges facing free governments, past and present, and his  admonitions regarding the steps needed to preserve critical institutions.
The previous commentary discussed the “office of dictator” in ancient Rome.

This is the fourth commentary examining Niccolo Machiavelli’s analysis of challenges facing free governments, past and present, and his  admonitions regarding the steps needed to preserve critical institutions.

The previous commentary discussed the “office of dictator” in ancient Rome.

The Roman Republic actually had such an office, but it was extremely limited in scope and duration; only put in place to respond to substantial and imminent threats when traditional political institutions were unable to do so.

When the threat was removed, the dictator stepped down and returned the  Republic to its prior good order.  At least that was the model, according to Machiavelli, until Julius Caesar abused the office by leading an army with  allegiance to him to threaten violence in the heart of the Republic thereby ending free government in ancient Rome.

The previous commentary concluded noting Donald Trump’s statement in a Fox News town hall meeting in April that he wanted to be “dictator for a day” after his possible election as President this November.  

He later “walked the comment back” in a Time Magazine interview saying the comment was a “joke.”

The subject of this commentary poses the follow-up question: If not as future dictator, what role does Trump occupy in current politics and is there any parallel to that role in political history?

Trump is certainly not a “role model” even to supporters.  On the eve of the Iowa caucuses, a middle-age Iowa woman, interviewed by an AP reporter,laughingly said that while she supported Trump, “I wouldn’t vote for him as my pastor.”

There are likely a substantial number of responsible roles that other supporters would also not want Trump to fill in their personal lives.

Notwithstanding, supporters enthusiastically embrace his “no holds barred” and “anything goes” approach to political practice, including incitements to violence which they discount because it is not aimed at them.  

Before Trump, a person with these flaws would have been automatically disqualified from any political role in America.  Those same flaws, however, would not be in the slightest disqualifying in 16th century
Italy if the role in question was that of mercenary.  

Mercenaries or “condottieri” occupied a prominent position in the political structure of the time.  The five major city states (Florence, Milan, Naples, Rome and Venice) all hired mercenaries to initiate and defend periodic, but repeated, military advances against one another.

Machiavelli railed against their role in Italian politics believing they brought ruin to the legitimate interests of the populace at large and the city states in particular.  His critique of their injurious effect was threefold.

First, by definition, mercenaries are “men without any territory.”  As a result, they owe allegiance only to themselves and view the world from that vantage.  Their leaders mistrust everyone.  They conspire against supposed friends, allies, and employers; and, believe others continually conspire against them.

If it is to their advantage, mercenaries shift allegiance or undercut alliances formed by their employers without hesitation.

Second, mercenaries are only paid in times of war.  As a result, they encourage and prolong division among employing city states and foreign interests in lieu of pursuing peace.

Their greatest source of funds is through plunder from the sacking the territories  of adversaries. They can be bribed and also extort employers and the citizenry if that is to better advantage and less risky.
Third, by practicing only the “Art of War,” mercenaries have no knowledge or experience in governing except by bullying, threats, and violence.

Mercenaries are ruthless and cruel. They demand absolute loyalty from troops upon penalty of exile or a gruesome death.  When unchecked, they rule as tyrants.

Donald Trump is the portrait of the modern-day political mercenary.

He reduced the Republican Party from a democratic institution to mercenary troops who either support him, are expelled, or confront “political death.”  RNC funds have become his personal plunder.

As President and candidate, Trump extorts or connives with foreign powers to provide dirt on domestic opponents.  He continually churns division in our body politic to prevent the possibility of peaceful resolution.  

As all mercenaries do, Trump schemes.  He overlays conspiracy upon conspiracy in a form of destructive paranoia that leads him to proclaim delusion as fact.  

Five hundred years ago, Machiavelli reviewed the aftermath of a political world of free government broken by the princes and mercenaries of Italy.

It is that same world Donald Trump now offers to America.
––––––––
Samuel Damren is an attorney and author in Ann Arbor.

The American Dream is smaller than it used to be. The National Association of Home Builders of the United States (NAHB) reports that new homes built in 2023 are, on average, smaller than homes built 15 years ago.

By Jules Yap
Wealth of Geeks

The American Dream is smaller than it used to be. The National Association of Home Builders of the United States (NAHB) reports that new homes built in 2023 are, on average, smaller than homes built 15 years ago.

In fact, in their 2024 study, “What Home Owners Really Want,” new home buyers are looking for even less space. New homes were 2,411 square feet in 2023, the smallest average size in 13 years – but buyers only want homes around 2,070 square feet.

Modern-day America is witness to the death of cookie-cutter homes and the traditional idea of the suburban neighborhood. Americans don’t want to share a house layout with their neighbors or have to look twice to see which house is theirs. They want something that’s uniquely theirs.

Self-expression inside and out

In a world where everyone carries around the same phone in their pocket and spends all their time using the same few apps, people look to differentiate themselves in other ways. They showcase what makes them unique through the clothes they wear, the items they purchase, and the causes they support.

Bell bottom jeans were the rage in the ’70s, and denim or Members Only jackets ruled the ’80s. But no more. Gone are the days of a whole generation being known for an item or style of clothing. You’re just as likely to see someone walking outside today in a head-to-toe anime print as you are in a three-piece suit.

The rise of the tiny house movement, the van life movement, and digital nomads increases the importance of product choices made when space is limited. Like creating an office or storage space under the stairs. So, it makes sense that consumers are more discerning and take their time to find the perfect item that reflects who they are.

Social media gives everyone more choices in how to express themselves and a platform to show off the choices they have made. It is no surprise that this type of individualism and customization is finding its way into people’s homes.

Even the building materials used to construct a home can now express the owner’s attitude. A desire for sustainability has building firms responding with more eco-friendly buildings – using materials like bamboo, cork, and hemp.

Revolutionary builder Alquist 3D uses 3D printing technology to build houses from the ground up. It’s faster, less labor intensive, and, most importantly, cheaper than traditional building methods. 3D printing builds a house one layer at a time. This lets architects and designers customize the build to suit the needs of their customers. They double down on their commitment to the environment with a carbon-neutral cement alternative.

A new generation of designers is ready to produce unique pieces for discerning customers in ways that weren’t possible even ten years ago. Designers like Theo Jansen can create innovative chairs and tables with complex, lightweight structures unachievable with traditional methods.

While it can be pricey, it doesn’t need to be.

Homeowners are finding ways to achieve unique designs

Interior design firms are often outside the budget limitations for the average person looking to make their home their own. An unending amount of decoration and design advice is available online for free. The Design My Room subreddit has more than 600,000 followers who swap tips on furniture arrangement and room layout, and Mr. Kate, an interior design YouTube channel, has almost 4 million subscribers.

Purchasing one-off pieces of bespoke furniture is one way to revamp a living room, but most people can’t afford to furnish a house that way. The rise of a new trend – IKEA hacking – may be the answer.

Consumers buy home furnishings without breaking the bank and then achieve the one-of-a-kind style they want by modifying it with IKEA hacking. This lets them personalize their furniture without breaking the bank. Adding paint, fabric, or new hardware can create stylish furniture that reflects your taste.

It’s not only the furniture that gets transformed. Your home’s interior quickly becomes unique, unlike anything found next door.

“We wanted a long desk for three people but couldn’t find exactly what we were looking for in stores,” says Monica Fish, founder of Planner at Heart. So, we bought a butcher block countertop and two gold designer table legs and created it ourselves. It is one of our favorite pieces in our house.”

There’s no going back

The demand for more individual, made-to-measure products isn’t going anywhere, and advancements in production technology, like 3D printing, will only increase what’s possible.

It’s true that some fashion trends come back around, but the idea that builders will return to creating neighborhoods of identical rows of houses seems highly unlikely.

So, what will the neighborhoods and living rooms of the future look like? One thing is for sure: they won’t all be the same.

Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study reports retirees who want to spend their golden years in comfort will need $500,000 more than in 2020. Over just four years, people’s “magic number” has jumped 53%.

By Christopher Alarcon
Wealth of Geeks

Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study reports retirees who want to spend their golden years in comfort will need $500,000 more than in 2020. Over just four years, people’s “magic number” has jumped 53%.

Of course, retirement expenses vary, but the national average now looks closer to a million and a half dollars needed. That’s especially true if you hope to move to Hawaii, California, New York, or Alaska.

Hawaii: The most expensive state for retirees

Hawaii, the island paradise, consistently ranks among the most expensive states to retire in. With average housing prices well above the national average and daily necessities, like groceries, up to 30% more expensive than on the mainland, you’ll need significant savings to make Hawaii your retirement dream.

Zillow reports that the typical home price in Hawaii was $861,040 in the first quarter of 2024. With a 4.5% sales tax applied in most counties, the average annual retirement expenses run to approximately $103,610, making the minimum savings for 25 years of retirement in Hawaii $2.05 million.

Massachusetts, California, New York, and Alaska are the next four most expensive states to retire in. However, cheaper options do exist.

Wyoming: The most affordable place to retire

On average, homeowners in Wyoming spend less than 30% of their monthly budget on housing. Investopedia records that the state has low costs for both Medicare and living expenses, making it not only the most affordable but also one of the most popular states to retire in.

The median house price in Wyoming is one-third that of Hawaii at just $330,000, and with a sales tax of only 4%, it’s easy to see how retirees could live well in Wyoming on a tight budget.
If Wyoming isn’t your idea of home, Utah, Montana, Idaho, and Virginia rank as the next most affordable states for retirees.

Retirement is changing

A 2022 Gallup study found people are retiring later, potentially reducing the number of years post-retirement without an income and the savings needed.

Retirees are much more likely to earn a small income from side gigs or part-time jobs than in the past, reducing the amount of savings needed.

The million-dollar retirement fund price tag for Hawaii doesn’t take into account investments that retirees may hold. Rental properties, stocks, and other financial products that produce income would reduce the need for such a large retirement fund.

Of course, the final puzzle piece is how much the person spends. Couples who are used to spending their wages frugally and living on a shoestring will find it easier to retire on less money, and for those who like to spend, start saving!

Florida — The most popular retirement state

At 6%, Florida has a higher sales tax than both Hawaii and Wyoming, and the Sunshine State’s median house price is $472,200, in line with the national average.

The state attracts retirees from all over the country; even Michael Jordan is spending his golden years there. Jordan isn’t the only basketball legend to move to the Sunshine State; Shaquille O’Neal spends most of his retirement in his Orlando mansion.

However, Florida didn’t make the top ten list of affordable places to retire — it ranked 43rd. So what is the attraction?

“I asked my father why he retired in Florida,” says Face Dragon ‘s Greg Gaynor. “His answer is representative of many retirees. ‘It’s the weather. Every day is a sunny day, so you can take a walk,
go to the beach, go to the bar. That’s what retirement is to our generation.’

Where can you afford to retire?

The Federal Reserve reported in 2023 that approximately 28% of Americans have no retirement savings.

For most people, retirement is a careful balance of savings and expenditure; it’s about balancing the life they want with the life they can afford. Expenses that soon-to-be-retirees must take into account include:

• Accommodation expenses
• Living expenses
• Transportation
• Medical costs
• Travel expenses

The difference between these five factors makes a state more or less affordable for retirees. However, Florida proves that price isn’t everything.

Cost is an essential factor, but it’s not the only thing to consider when deciding where to retire.

Prakash Kolli, finance and retirement expert of Dividend Power, says, “Before deciding, research essential criteria first, like taxes, health care access, property prices, and daily living expenses, but remember that this isn’t a holiday. Consider the things you do every day, local amenities like malls and restaurants, distance to loved ones, and, of course, pick somewhere with the weather you enjoy.”

No one likes being dumped, and if you’re currently embroiled in legal issues, the last thing you need is to be jettisoned by your lawyer. Here are my top tips to foster a healthy attorney-client relationship.

By Marie E. Matyjaszek
   
No one likes being dumped, and if you’re currently embroiled in legal issues, the last thing you need is to be jettisoned by your lawyer. Here are my top tips to foster a healthy attorney-client relationship.

Don’t hire a champagne attorney on a beer budget. Yes, lawyers are expensive, and some people have family or friends to help them foot the bill, but if you truly cannot afford the services of the attorney you’d like (whether from the outset or partway through the case), be honest with your attorney. Some may offer sliding scales, reduced rates, payment plans or participate in pro bono services. They also may be able to recommend a competent attorney at a price you can afford.

Once you decide on an attorney, read the retainer agreement more than once. Ask questions if you don’t understand something in the contract. Ultimately, once you sign it, you are responsible to uphold your end of the bargain. Not doing so could lead to termination of representation.

Return documents and respond to e-mails on a timely basis. The time constraints you may find burdensome are often set by the court, court rules, or statute – it is not your attorney being unreasonable. If you can’t comply with a deadline, let your attorney know immediately so he can ask about an extension. If you don’t cooperate, your attorney can’t put forward a successful case.

Speaking of timing, show up to court and appointments on time. Many matters are still being held via Zoom, which means less justification for tardiness. Being late shows a lack of respect and preparedness. A professional you’ve hired to work for you shouldn’t have to wait on you, and vice versa – keep each other informed as to any delays.

Be respectful to your attorney’s staff, ALWAYS. They are the gatekeepers and are extremely knowledgeable people to have on your side. Behind the scenes is their world, and they are likely to be the ones setting up hearings and appointments, drafting documents and helping manage your case. They may also have an hourly rate or charge for particular services – this should be spelled out in your retainer agreement. If you don’t see anything in the contract, ask so you’re not surprised when you get your bill.

Last, be honest. About everything. You can do yourself no greater disservice than lying to your lawyer. If you can’t tell the truth to someone bound by legal pinky promises, who can you tell?

The author 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 e-mailing her at matyjasz@hotmail.com.