Maxwell v. Darren Dodd, James Knight (Secret Service agents) November 2009 (Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, Federal District Court)

Jury Verdict returned in favor of Plaintiff for violations of 4th Amendment by Secret Service Agents for wrongful search of Plaintiff’s residence, wrongful seizure of Plaintiff’s items, and wrongful detention of Plaintiff and her minor children after arrest at Plaintiff’s home of another person

Leverenz v. Debra and Scott Brown, April 2009 (Wayne County Circuit Court)

Jury Verdict returned in favor of Plaintiff against individual Defendants and their companies for wrongful eviction, violations of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, intentional fraud by the Defendants, exemplary damages, return of Plaintiff’s security deposit, and Plaintiff was awarded his actual attorney fees and court costs

Klaassen v. St. Clair Township, September 2007 (St. Clair County Circuit Court)

Jury Verdict returned in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant Township finding that Plaintiff was discharged without cause in violation of 42 USC 1983, and was awarded backpay, attorney fees and court costs.

Lafata v. Church of Christ Homes for the Aged, 325 Fed.Appx. 416 (6th. Cir. May 20, 2009) Click here to read more

Burgess & Sharp wins 6th Circuit Appeal

Township of Casco v. Secretary of State, 472 Mich. 566, 701 N.W.2d 102, 104 (2005)

Plaintiffs in this case were two adjacent townships-Casco Township and Columbus Township-and residents of those townships who sought to detach territory from the City of Richmond. The territory sought to be detached was territory previously annexed to the City of Richmond.

Plaintiffs sought to present the ballot issue covering both townships in a single petition. This would result in a single vote about whether to detach territory from the City of Richmond and add the territory to Casco Township and Columbus Township. The residents of one township would be voting on the return of property to their township, as well as the return of property to a township in which they do not reside. The Secretary of State refused to approve an election on plaintiffs' petition because an election on the petition would allow residents of one township to vote on, and possibly determine, a change in the boundaries of another township in which they do not reside.

Plaintiffs filed a complaint for mandamus and declaratory relief. The circuit court dismissed plaintiffs' complaint for mandamus to compel the Secretary of State to act because it was not clear that a single petition seeking detachment from a city and addition of the territory to two townships was permitted by the Home Rule City Act. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the circuit court. Casco Twp. v. Secretary of State, 261 Mich.App. 386, 682 N.W.2d 546 (2004). After briefing and oral argument, the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed.  The City of Richmond was represented by Rex A. Burgess, PLC, the predecessor to Burgess & Sharp, PLLC.