Showing posts with label defense attorney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label defense attorney. Show all posts

Monday, December 26, 2011

Nursing Home Liability: Who Owns the Facility

A recent 2.35 million dollar Macomb County jury verdict shines a light on the ownership and practices of a nursing home in St. Clair Shores.  Bankruptcy and missing records clouded the identity of the real party in interest in a negligence law suit resulting from the 2008 choking death of a resident.

Turned out to be the Nightingale East Nursing Center, owned in part by a now-defunct company, and eventually traced to SavaSeniorCare, an LLC located in Atlanta, GA.

In the litigation, St. Clair Shores attorney John Perrin experienced an evidentiary mistrial and a mishandled document request in clawing his way to the jury verdict.  For their part, the defense attorneys claim that the botched corporate disclosure was not intentional.  Looking for the upside, defense attorneys Plunkett and Cooney (Jenny Andreou) claimed a partial victory through limiting the "non-economic" damage component of the verdict; a motion for remittur has been filed.

This death resulted from a resident choking on a golfball sized meatball; a largely unforeseeable event.  The jury found other liability factors in awarding plaintiff millions of dollars.  Obviously, we want to avoid this fate for any of our families and loved ones that are placed in a nursing home.

Serving as the guardian for more than 100 individuals, many of whom have been placed in nursing homes, I have learned that you can never pay close enough attention to the ward's care.  Complaints against licensed facilities are common and serve the purpose of compelling care improvements.

Nursing homes, assisted care facilities, and adult foster care residences provide a dizzying array of care choices and regulations.  Making the right placement for a family member or loved one is a critical decision.

In Macomb County, follow this link for skilled and basic care nursing homes.  In Oakland County, follow this link for the same information.

www.waterfordlegal.com

info@waterfordlegal.com

Monday, April 11, 2011

Collateral Consequences of a Guilty Plea

When an accused pleads guilty to a crime, the complexity of our modern legal system often leaves some of the significant consequences of the plea undetected.  After all, that's why you hired a lawyer in the first place, right?

These undetected consequences include quasi-criminal matters such as immigration as well as less obvious examples like disqualification from certain career paths or professional degrees; or affecting a client's parent-child relationship.

Recognizing this growing problem back in 2006, the State Bar of Michigan's Criminal Issues Initiative sought to educate criminal defense lawyers and the public by developing material useful to making a fully informed decision.

In addition, the SBM's website provides useful and current information for those either facing a criminal plea, or those attempting to recover from one.  The web site includes a checklist for clients to complete, the Michigan Re-entry Law Wiki link, and information about housing, immigration, employment, and child/parent issues.

Just recently, the SBM's Representative Assembly (the State Bar's elected governing body) passed a resolution to support legislation for the collection and notification of all collateral consequences involved with a criminal guilty plea.

Attorneys are challenged to keep-up with the multi-faceted and ever-expanding consequences of criminal convictions in our modern world.  When facing the prospect of a criminal guilty plea, even for a misdemeanor, be sure you hire a lawyer that knows about such consequences.

www.clarkstonlegal.com

info@clarkstonlegal.com

Friday, November 26, 2010

Oakland County's Ax-Murdering Teacher-Housewife Receives Habeas Relief

Sorry about that headline.  But this case was all-over your evening news back in 2004, when kindergarten teacher Nancy Ann Seaman axed her long-time husband to death on Mother's Day.

Earlier this month, a federal judge granted Seaman's petition for Habeas Corpus.  Habeas relief is considered when a convicted inmate, having exhausted her state court appeals, sues the warden of her prison in federal court on the theory she is being illegally detained by the State of Michigan in light of constitutional errors in a state court criminal proceeding.

Ms. Seaman was jury convicted of first degree murder before soon-retiring Oakland Circuit Judge John McDonald.  Seven-months after her trial, Judge McDonald reduced Seaman's conviction from first to second degree murder.

Both Seaman and the prosecutor appealed.  The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and reinstated Seaman's first degree murder conviction.  [The linked MCOA opinion contains a fascinating in-court colloquy about premeditation between the prosecutor and trial judge at the hearing on Seaman's motion for a new trial, beginning on page 5.]

The Court of Appeals found (by 2-1) that the trial court abused its discretion by acting as a "thirteenth juror" in reducing the conviction to second degree murder.  The intermediate appellate court also held that premeditation has no set time-frame but rather, can be established in the fleeting moment that it takes to have a "second look" at an imminent homicide.

Dissenting Judge Karen Fort Hood was troubled by the apparent "disconnect" between Seaman's self defense theory and testimony regarding "battered spouse syndrome".  Evidence relative to the latter theory was limited by the trial court.  Judge Fort Hood also commented on what she perceived as a confusion of jury instructions on the two concepts.  See the last two pages of the above link for her concise dissent.

The Michigan Supreme Court declined further review of Ms. Seaman's conviction.

With her state appellate options exhausted, Seaman turned to federal court via Habeas Corpus.  In her initially successful petition, she asserted that she was denied her right to effective trial counsel, guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, when Attorney Lawrence Kaluzny did not challenge a ruling by the trial court that limited the testimony of Seaman's expert on "battered spouse syndrome".  [BTW: In Oakland County, you just cannot hire better trial counsel than Larry Kaluzny.]  The federal judge has ordered a new trial for Seaman.

We here at the LawBlogger, however, need you to stay tuned on this one as Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox is appealing the federal district court judge's order to the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

info@clarkstonlegal.com

http://www.clarkstonlegal.com/

Categories