What motivated you to become a trial lawyer? I chose a career as a trial lawyer because I wanted to help people overcome hardship and hold those responsible for causing the hardship accountable.

When did you become a member of MAJ?  Why did you decide to join? I joined MAJ in 2013, the year after I became licensed, at the recommendation of a partner at the firm where I worked. At that time, I knew nothing about the MAJ.

Why do you feel it is important for trial lawyers to be a part of MAJ? In our practices, we communicate primarily with defense attorneys, and that communication, cordial as it may be, is invariably adversarial. Being a member of the MAJ provides opportunities to communicate with other lawyers who want you to succeed; to have constructive and informative dialogue about issues you encounter in your everyday practice.

Please describe the extent of your MAJ participation. I’m a sustaining member, JUSTICE PAC contributor, and member of the autonomous vehicle committee.

You have made a strong commitment to the JUSTICE PAC.  Why do you feel supporting the PAC is important? A reason specific to us as trial lawyers is that the money from the JUSTICE PAC goes to preserve and advance the constitutional right to a jury trial, which is always under attack by special interests that seek to shirk their responsibilities to the public. More generally, I personally feel that there is a very loud minority in the United States seeking to inject anger and fear into the legislative process to advance an archaic agenda, and that the JUSTICE PAC money supporting the MAJ’s political activities is vital to countering those efforts of the few to move us backward.

What is distinctive about your practice?  And your firm? I feel that I’ve done a superb job of eliminating wasted effort and time from my practice; that I’ve developed a system by which I’ve reached near-optimum efficiency. There is always room for improvement, and I’m dedicated to maintaining a perpetual state of self-improvement.

What is your most memorable case? My most memorable case was a rather typical PIP case in Genesee County Circuit Court that culminated in my first jury trial. When the jury retired for deliberation, I decided I would wait in the courtroom until they returned, but after several hours had passed, I was terribly hungry. So, I decided run to that Mexican restaurant across Court Street from the courthouse. I ordered loaded nachos, and the server brought out a delicious-looking pile of nachos. Literally, right when the food hit the table, my phone rang; it was the court clerk recalling me to the courtroom because the jury had reached a verdict. I ran back to the courthouse, and the jury returned a verdict in my client’s favor.

Thereafter, I returned to the restaurant to eat my nachos; the restaurant had graciously agreed to hold them for me although I had already paid and left. While I ate, I called my office and then my parents to report my triumph. Driving home, I felt like a great trial lawyer; that feeling has never left me.

What was your most satisfying case? Years ago represented a father who was giving his young daughter a snowmobile ride on Houghton Lake when he was injured in a collision with another snowmobile. The defendant fled the scene on the snowmobile of a friend he had been riding with, leaving his snowmobile behind, later claiming that he left per a mutual agreement with my client that everyone was okay and no police report was necessary. Of course, there had been no such agreement and my client had already called the police while the defendant was still at the scene; police had reached the edge of the lake and saw the defendant flee. The police identified the defendant using the snowmobile that he had left behind, but aside from a cursory interview with the defendant hours later, there was no police investigation.

Discovery started with the defendant’s representation in his interrogatory answers he and his one friend at the scene – both Canadians – had come from Canada alone for a snowmobile trip. The defendant would not produce his companion for a deposition, so I used letters rogatory to get an order from a Canadian court for his appearance. From that companion’s deposition, I learned of more individuals who had accompanied the defendant on the trip, and from deposing these additional persons, I learned yet more names; all the while using letters rogatory to get Canadian court orders compelling their depositions as the companions were all Canadian and the defendant would not produce them.

Through the depositions, it became clear that the reason the defendant had fled was because he had been intoxicated. Consequently, the credibility of the defense that my client had been at fault for the accident was destroyed. The satisfaction came with being able to hold the defendant accountable for his negligence and obtaining a tidy sum for my client, who had confided in me at the outset of the case that he felt the situation was hopeless.

Please provide a brief description of your interests outside the practice of law. I spend as much time as possible with my wife and son. Outside of that, I enjoy going to the gym before work, skiing, and playing tennis.

Is there anything else that you would like to share? I’m guilty of not participating enough on the List Server. I’m going to try to participate on it at least once per week.