Michigan Supreme Court

DFP on Michigan Supreme Court Race: Hathaway vs. Taylor

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

From the Detroit Free Press:

The race for a single eight-year term on the Michigan Supreme Court finally began to live up to expectations in the closing weeks of the campaign 2008 election, as relative quiet gave way to a barrage of advertising and accusations.

On one side is Chief Justice Clifford Taylor, a Republican who has been on the court since his appointment by former governor John Engler in 1997. On the other, Wayne County Circuit Judge Diane Hathaway, whose surname is judicially familiar in southeast Michigan but was a second choice for Democrats when the party’s preferred nominee declined to run.

Behind both candidates are well-heeled special interests for whom influence on the Michigan Supreme Court is of great importance. Business is backing Taylor; attorneys, especially plaintiffs lawyers, and unions want Hathaway.

Since losing their majority on the court during the Engler era, Democrats have tried and failed repeatedly to regain control of the high court. Although no incumbent justice has lost an election since 1984, state party officials said early on that beating Taylor was their second highest priority behind carrying Michigan for Barack Obama this year.

Continue reading →

Michigan Supreme Court Justice Marilyn Kelly to Speak at MSU

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The Honorable Marilyn J. Kelly
Justice, Michigan Supreme Court
With an introduction by:
Joan W. Howarth
Dean and Professor of Law, Michigan State University College of Law
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
7:00 pm – Hors d’oeuvres
7:30 pm – Program
Kellogg Conference Center
55 S. Harrison Road
Big Ten Room A
East Lansing, Michigan
There is no cost to attend this event.

Fletcher on “Laughing Whitefish” and Tribal Customary Law

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Matthew Fletcher posted “Laughing Whitefish: A Tale of Justice and Anishinaabe Custom” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Laughing Whitefish, a novel by Robert Traver, the pen name of former Michigan Supreme Court Justice John Voelker, is the fictionalized story of a case that reached the Michigan Supreme Court three times, culminating in Kobogum v. Jackson Iron Co., 43 N.W. 602 (Mich. 1889). The petitioner, Charlotte Kobogum, an Ojibwe Indian from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, brought suit to recover under a note issued to her father, Marji Gesick, by the mining company in the 1840s. The company had promised a share in the company because he had led them to one of the largest iron ore deposits in the country, the famed Jackson Mine. Despite the company’s defense that Mr. Gesick was a polygamist and therefore Ms. Kobogum could not be his legitimate heir, the Michigan Supreme Court held that state courts had no right to interfere with internal, domestic relations of reservation Indians, and upheld the claim. Justice Voelker’s tale is a powerful defense of the decision, and offers insights into why state courts should recognize the judgments of tribal courts even today.

book cover of Laughing Whitefish by Robert Traver

Talk on John Voelker/Robert Traver’s “Laughing Whitefish” on Sept. 27

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

As part of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the publication of Robert Traver’s Anatomy of a Murder, I will be giving a presentation on Traver’s novel, “Laughing Whitefish,” which is based on the three Michigan Supreme Court cases involving Marji Kobogum’s daughter Charlotte, aka Laughing Whitefish.

The presentation is at the Library of Michigan, on Sept. 27, 2008:

11:10 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Session A:  Laughing Whitefish
Forum Auditorium
John D. Voelker’s courtroom drama Laughing Whitefish tells the story of a young Chippewa woman’s struggle to collect a debt owed to her father by the Jackson Ore Company.  It is based on a case that went before the Michigan Supreme Court three times in the 1880s before it was resolved. This session will discuss the book, the actual Kawbawgam case and their impact on Michigan Native Americans.

Here are the legal materials in the case:

kobogum-v-jackson-iron-1889

compo-v-jackson-iron-1883

compo-v-jackson-iron-1882

Michigan Supreme Court Ranked Last

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the “Internet“:

The “verdict” is not a good one for the Michigan Supreme Court. A University Of Chicago Law School ranking of the nation’s 50 state supreme courts lists Michigan’s at the bottom. The research combined such measures as judicial independence from political or outside influences, its numbers of published opinions, and how often the court’s decisions are referenced in rulings by other courts.

Traverse City attorney Tim Smith is concerned about the impact the report will have on the state’s image.

“As an attorney, I can’t disagree with it and I can’t say I’m surprised. And, as a member of the State Bar of Michigan, I’m embarrassed.”

Continue reading →

Report on Special Interests’ Impact on Midwest State Supreme Courts

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From Media Mouse:

The Midwest Democracy Network and the Justice at Stake Campaign have released a new report that examines the influence that special interests–corporate interests, trial lawyers, ideological groups, and partisan political groups–having on elections for state judges in the Midwest. The report, titled “The New Politics of Judicial Elections in the Great Lakes, 2000-2008,” examines recent judicial elections in Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Ohio. Some important findings include:

* Of the 22 states nationally that use contestable elections to choose members of their high courts, three of the most expensive can be found in the Midwest (Illinois, Ohio and Michigan).

* More than half of all television advertisements that have appeared in state Supreme Court races since 2000 have aired in one of these three states.

* The most expensive contested judicial election in American history took place in Illinois in 2004, when two candidates combined to raise over $9.3 million. (The winner called the fundraising ‘obscene.’)

With regard to Michigan the report found that:

* Independent groups are evolving into long-term surrogates for incumbents and challengers and are continuing to exist beyond the specific election around which they formed.

* Special interest groups are buying the majority of the television advertising in the Michigan Supreme Court elections (87% in 2006). There are no disclosure requirements for groups that run “issue” advertisements–including those that mention specific candidates by name.

* 86% of the cases heard by the Michigan Supreme Court in the 1990s involved a contributor to at least one of the justices.

The report recommends that Michigan adopt public financing of Supreme Court elections as a means of mitigating the influence of special interest groups, in addition to urging the state to adopt regulations that require more disclosure for groups running “issue” advertisements.

Michigan Supreme Court “Report Card”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Detroit Free Press:

Michigan’s court of last resort gets its first report card

The Michigan Supreme Court is the end of the line for those seeking justice as this state sees fit to define it.

Lose there, and it’s time to pay your lawyer and move on — or, if yours is a criminal appeal, to go back to making license plates.

Continue reading →

Mich. Supreme Court Justice Cavanagh Remarks before the Michigan Indian Judicial Association

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The text of Justice Cavanagh’s talk can be downloaded here: Justice Cavanagh’s Remarks

Still More Press Coverage of Inland Settlement

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From The Mining Journal:

Key dates in the battle over Indian hunting and fishing rights in Michigan:

1836: Treaty of Washington between Ottawa and Chippewa bands and the United States. Tribes cede ownership of about 13.9 million acres in northern Lower Peninsula, eastern Upper Peninsula.

1930: Michigan Supreme Court rules no Indian fishing rights exist under previous treaties.

1971: Court reverses itself, saying Bay Mills Indian Community has treaty fishing rights.

1973: Federal government files suit, seeking state recognition of tribal fishing rights.

1985: Consent decree reached, setting tribal and non-tribal fishing zones in portions of Lakes Michigan, Huron and Superior.

2000: Updated version of consent decree approved.

2003: Michigan asks court to rule that tribal fishing rights on inland waters and 1836 treaty lands have expired.

Sept. 26, 2007: State, tribes announce settlement of inland rights case.