What

Where

Trusted Across Michigan

2,500

+

Verified Listings

Built for Clients & Attorneys

Every Practice Area

Your Search Starts Here:
Michigan Top Lawyers makes it simple to find the right attorney.

Our Top Rated Lawyers

Popular Exclusive Listings In Our Directory

The Elder Care Firm

The Elder Care Firm

Be the first one to rate!

860 W Grand River Ave

Practice Areas : Elder Law

Seva Law Firm

Be the first one to rate!

1050 Wilshire Suite 335 Troy, MI 48084

Practice Areas : Insurance

Giarmarco, Mullins & Horton, P.C.

Giarmarco, Mullins & Horton, P.C.

Be the first one to rate!

101 West Big Beaver Road 10th Floor Columbia Center Troy, Michigan 48084

Practice Areas : Commercial Real Estate

Freel Professional Corp

Freel Professional Corp

Be the first one to rate!

540 West Lake St., Suite 2 Tawas City, MI 48763

Practice Areas : Admiralty and Maritime Law

Davis Law Group PLLC

Davis Law Group PLLC

Be the first one to rate!

27600 Northwestern Hwy Ste 215 Southfield, MI 48034

Practice Areas : Criminal Law

Kathryn Wayne-Spindler & Associates

Kathryn Wayne-Spindler & Associates

Be the first one to rate!

425 West Huron Street, Suite 120 Milford, MI 48381

Practice Areas : Criminal Law

How it Works

It’s easy to find and book a lawyer and also to share your experience.

Find Your Lawyer

Find Your Lawyer

Explore top Michigan lawyers by city, practice area, and reviews.

Contact a Lawyer

Contact a Lawyer

Connect with trusted Michigan attorneys for fast, reliable help.

Review A Lawyer

Review A Lawyer

Rate Michigan lawyers and guide others to the best legal support.

Browse Lawyers

Find the Michigan Attorney for YOU!

Real Reviews from Clients

Across Michigan

Michigan Legal News

A Snapshot of Michigan Tribes Exercising Sovereignty – Turtle Talk

A Snapshot of Michigan Tribes Exercising Sovereignty – Turtle Talk

Today is Michigan Indian Day, designated by Michigan law as the fourth Friday of every September. In honor of the day, I’m offering a snapshot of what Tribal sovereignty looks like in Michigan. It includes: Land Back • Treaty Rights • Citizenship • Education • Child Welfare • Health Care • Policing • Courts • Utilities • Economic Regulation • Manoomin • Culturally Grounded Governance Below are 12 recent examples, one drawn from each Michigan Tribe. It looks like bringing ancestral land home, and deciding what happens next. At the end of 2024, 188 acres along West Grand Traverse Bay were returned to the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. GTB named the land Mashkiigaki, “place of the medicines,” reflecting its significance for hunting, fishing, gathering, medicines, wetlands, and coastal habitat. Since then, GTB has begun reconnecting Tribal citizens with the land and laying the groundwork for ecocultural restoration. The Tribe has surveyed citizens about their memories and aspirations for Mashkiigaki, initiated bird and invasive species surveys, planned a study of creek and wetland hydrology, and begun mapping sensitive habitat and possible public access routes. In 2026, GTB received approximately $1.3 million from NOAA, part of the federal grant approved in 2024, to support restoration and community engagement at Mashkiigaki. The planning remains Tribal-led, with elders, citizens, and government staff helping determine the land’s future. GTB’s announcement on the return of Mashkiigaki It looks like leading a fight to protect treaty-protected waters. Bay Mills Indian Community has been a central leader in the Tribal campaign against both the existing Line 5 dual pipelines and Enbridge’s proposed tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac. Its opposition is grounded in the 1836 Treaty of Washington, treaty-protected fishing and gathering rights, and the Tribe’s sovereign responsibility to protect Michilimackinac, a sacred place at the heart of Anishinaabe creation traditions. Bay Mills formally called for Line 5’s decommissioning in March 2015, supported Michigan’s 2020 revocation and termination of Enbridge’s 1953 easement, and in 2021 formally banished Line 5 from Tribal lands, including the Straits. The Tribe also helped bring the dispute before the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, which in 2023 recommended that the United States and Canada decommission Line 5. In litigation over the existing crossing, Bay Mills filed amicus briefs supporting the State’s efforts to keep its shutdown cases in state court, including a 2023 Sixth Circuit brief in Nessel v. Enbridge on behalf of a coalition that NARF describes as more than 60 Tribal Nations and First Nations. Bay Mills has simultaneously challenged the proposed tunnel before the Michigan Public Service Commission, EGLE, the Michigan courts, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It intervened in the MPSC proceeding and introduced Tribal and expert testimony on treaty rights, fisheries, climate impacts, alternatives, and tunnel explosion risks. It also challenged EGLE’s 2021 wetlands permit and participated in the Army Corps’ federal review as a cooperating agency. In March 2025, Bay Mills and other Tribes withdrew as cooperating agencies after the Corps moved to fast-track approval under the asserted national “energy emergency.” The MPSC approved the tunnel in December 2023, and the Court of Appeals affirmed in February 2025. In July 2026, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated the MPSC’s approval. It remanded for a new analysis of the project’s environmental effects, feasible alternatives, and impacts on public trust resources (In re Application of Enbridge Energy to Replace & Relocate Line 5, No. 168335 (Mich. July 31, 2026)). EGLE had approved wetlands and bottomlands permits for the tunnel two weeks earlier. The Army Corps issued its record of decision in August notwithstanding the ruling, and Bay Mills condemned the federal decision as a breach of treaty and trust responsibilities. In September 2026, after Governor Whitmer announced that EGLE would re-review its permits, Bay Mills and three other Tribal Nations petitioned for a contested case hearing to overturn them. Bay Mills’ Line 5 information portal Michigan Supreme Court decision It looks like deciding who belongs to the political community. In March 2026, Hannahville Indian Community amended its Tribal Enrollment Ordinance, governing membership applications, the Enrollment Committee, appeals, records, relinquishment, and loss of membership. Few exercises of governmental authority are more foundational than determining the citizenship of the political community. Hannahville’s 2026 Tribal Enrollment Ordinance It looks like reshaping a regional education system. Keweenaw Bay Indian Community is leading a five-year Promise Neighborhood covering the L’Anse Reservation and surrounding Baraga County. The cradle-to-career initiative links local schools with early childhood, family, college, and career supports; KBIC cultural advocates and Ojibwe language instructors also work with area schools to bring Ojibwe language, history, and culture into classrooms. KBIC Promise Neighborhoods U.S. Department of Education project profile It looks like exercising responsibility for Tribal children under Tribal law. The Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe governs child protection through its own Children’s Code and institutions. Tribal law provides for Children’s Court jurisdiction, child protection proceedings, foster care and child care regulation, adoption, and other matters affecting Tribal children, while Anishnaabeg Child and Family Services carries out child and family services within that Tribal governmental and legal framework. Saginaw Chippewa Children’s Code Anishnaabeg Child and Family Services It looks like building a health system across the Upper Peninsula. The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians operates nine health clinics or centers across its 7-county service area, providing varying combinations of medical, dental, behavioral health, pharmacy, and other services. Earlier this week, the Tribe broke ground on a major expansion and renovation of its Sault Health Center, designed to improve patient care while maintaining connections to Anishinaabe spiritual and cultural beliefs. Sault Tribe Health Division September 22 groundbreaking announcement It looks like making jurisdiction work across borders. In October 2025, the City of Petoskey formally swore in Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians Tribal Police under a cross-deputization arrangement allowing LTBB officers to assist within city jurisdiction. Petoskey officers, in turn, were to be sworn in by LTBB so they could respond where the Tribe has primary jurisdiction. The arrangement is especially striking given that shortly after LTBB’s federal reaffirmation, local officials once accused its officers of “impersonating police officers.” Today, Tribal and local governments extend law enforcement authority to one another. Petoskey Department of Public Safety 2025 Annual Report Frank Ettawageshik recounts LTBB’s earlier cross-deputization history It looks like a Tribal court telling another branch of Tribal government what the Constitution requires. In Romanelli v. Tribal Council, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Tribal Court ruled in May that the Ogema’s proposed FY2026 budget had become the Tribal budget by operation of the Constitution and issued a writ of mandamus requiring the Tribal Council to appropriate the funds. That’s Tribal constitutional law in action, with a Tribal judiciary resolving a separation of powers dispute within Tribal government. Romanelli v. Tribal Council order It looks like making sure the drinking water is safe and the sewer system works. In March, the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians (Gun Lake Tribe) enacted a new Water and Sewer Act. The law creates a Tribal regulatory system covering utility connections, permits, inspections, industrial discharges, water use restrictions, enforcement, fines, and Tribal Court proceedings. Sometimes sovereignty looks like constitutional litigation, and sometimes it looks like the sewer code. Gun Lake Tribe Water and Sewer Act It looks like regulating a new market, and mobilizing government to protect citizens. In 2025, the Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians entered a Tribal-State cannabis compact allowing a Tribally regulated cannabis business to participate in Michigan’s regulated market. Then, in January, amid concerns about ICE activity affecting Native people, the Tribal Council issued formal guidance to citizens, waived fees for replacement Tribal IDs, and directed citizens to Tribal enrollment, law enforcement, leadership, and legal offices for assistance. LVD–Michigan cannabis agreement LVD Tribal Council statement regarding ICE activity It looks like making law for a relative rather than merely regulating a commodity. In September 2025, the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi enacted a Mnomen (Wild Rice) Code. The law recognizes Mnomen as the Tribe’s official grain and a protected Tribal resource, creates a Mnomen Wgema composed of Tribal citizens, regulates harvesting and transplantation, authorizes enforcement by Tribal conservation officers, and provides penalties for violations. The Code also recognizes Mnomen as a living spirit, medicine, and part of the Tribe’s migration story. Environmental regulation, cultural responsibility, and Indigenous law operate here in the same legal framework. NHBP Mnomen (Wild Rice) Code It looks like designing governmental institutions on Indigenous terms. Under the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians’ Elders Council Code, the Elders Council is a governmental instrumentality that provides guidance to the membership and to the Band’s legislative, executive, and judicial institutions on matters of history, traditions, and culture. Pokagon law also permits one of the seven Tribal Council seats to be held by an Elders Council representative, who carries all the rights and responsibilities of a Tribal Councilperson. Pokagon Elders Council Code, current through May 2026 Every day across the state, each of Michigan’s 12 Tribes exercises governmental authority over lands, resources, institutions, services, and citizens. Source link

September 25, 2026

Civil Practice – Discovery – Dismissal

Civil Practice – Discovery – Dismissal

Where a defendant has filed a motion to dismiss, that motion should be allowed because of the plaintiff’s pattern of failing to satisfy discovery obligations and failing to comply with court orders. “Plaintiff Justin Clayton—through his attorney Jason Daniel Wine—has repeatedly failed to meaningfully engage in discovery with Defendant. This is true despite multiple discovery extensions, court orders compelling Plaintiff to provide discovery material to Defendant, and even sanctions imposed on Plaintiff’s counsel. So—for the second time—Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint under Civil Rules 37(b)(2)(A) and 41(b). As explained below, given Plaintiff’s pattern of failing to satisfy discovery obligations and failing to comply with Court orders, this Court will grant Defendant’s motion and dismiss Plaintiff’s case with prejudice. … “Here, Attorney Wine’s continued disregard of the discovery rules and this Court’s orders has been unquestionably willful. Indeed, this disregard has continued despite numerous admonishments and lesser sanctions. … “But as is particularly relevant to this case, the Sixth Circuit ‘has expressed reluctance to uphold a dismissal “merely to discipline an errant attorney” to the detriment of an innocent client.’ … “The Sixth Circuit’s warning of caution is the primary reason this Court directed Clayton himself to attend a status conference on May 7, 2026: so that Clayton would be on notice regarding the severity of Attorney Wine’s willful failures to obey court orders and engage in discovery. … Admirably, throughout the last year, Attorney Wine has repeatedly fallen on his sword and represented to this Court that all the discovery failures are attributable to him, and not his client. … Yet even after the May 7 status conference, Clayton elected to continue with Attorney Wine as his representative, and expressed that he is just ‘along for the ride’ and ‘hopeful [that] it works out.’ … In this way, it appears Clayton himself is a willful participant in the ongoing failures to engage in discovery and obey court orders. “At bottom, it appears both Clayton and Attorney Wine have willfully failed to engage in discovery and obey court orders, especially during the last year of discovery. Although much of the fault for this lies with Attorney Wine, some fault also lies with Clayton himself, as Clayton is aware of these ongoing failures. … “The second factor favors dismissal because Fowlerville has been prejudiced by Clayton’s ongoing, years-long failure to meaningfully engage in discovery and comply with this Court’s discovery orders. … “At bottom, this Court has imposed lesser sanctions, but still Clayton and Attorney Wine continued to disregard court orders and discovery obligations. Thus, this fourth factor weighs in favor of dismissal. … “Having considered all four factors, they all weigh in favor of dismissal. Thus, this Court will dismiss Clayton’s third amended complaint, ECF No. 29, with prejudice as a sanction under both Civil Rule 37(b)(2)(A) and Civil Rule 41(b).” Clayton v. Fowlerville Cmty. Sch.; MiLW No. 02-111152, 23 pages; U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan; DeClercq, J. Source link

September 25, 2026

The House Natural Resources Committee Advances Tribal Buffalo Bill as Interior Restricts Bison Grazing – Turtle Talk

The House Natural Resources Committee Advances Tribal Buffalo Bill as Interior Restricts Bison Grazing – Turtle Talk

The House Natural Resources Committee is moving to support Tribal buffalo restoration while the BLM is proposing a grazing rule that could make some bison restoration projects harder to sustain on federal land. On September 15, the House Natural Resources Committee advanced the Don Young Doug LaMalfa Indian Buffalo Management Act. H.R. 7954 would support Tribal buffalo programs, authorize Interior to transfer surplus buffalo from federal land to Indian land, and require Interior’s buffalo management policy for Indian land to follow Tribal laws and Tribally approved plans. Interior has testified in support of the bill. In May, BLM revoked American Prairie’s permits to graze bison on federal land in Montana, saying the Taylor Grazing Act permits grazing only for livestock managed primarily for production. BLM has also proposed applying a “production-oriented livestock” requirement to BLM grazing permits outside Alaska and eliminating the separate permit provision for indigenous animals. The comment period closed July 13; the rule hasn’t been finalized. American Prairie’s herd has supplied bison to other herds for food sovereignty, cultural restoration, and hunting. On September 4, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction for the three allotments where its bison already graze, finding American Prairie likely to succeed on its claims. The judge expressly considered the effects of BLM’s decision on American Prairie’s Tribal partners. The proposed rule would also reach Tribal herds directly. BLM said its American Prairie decision did not affect Tribal grazing authorizations or Tribal bison herds, but the proposed rule contains no Tribal exclusion. When BLM first applied the production-oriented test to American Prairie in January, the Coalition of Large Tribes protested that it would make it unlikely any Tribal herd could qualify for BLM leases, including those the Fort Bidwell Indian Community and Pit River Tribe are seeking for their buffalo. The proposed rule would apply that test to BLM grazing permits outside Alaska, and COLT has objected that it was published without prior Tribal consultation. The bill wouldn’t decide American Prairie’s case or govern BLM grazing permits. But the case shows why the proposed rule matters to Tribal restoration, since buffalo raised on federal land can be part of bringing buffalo back to Tribal communities. Related Resources H.R. 7954 House Natural Resources Committee, September 15 markup announcement Bureau of Land Management, May 8 permit decision announcement September 4 preliminary injunction order, American Prairie Foundation v. U.S. Department of the Interior Coalition of Large Tribes protest letter, January 30, 2026 Disappearing Bison by Starr Hardridge (Muscogee Creek Nation) Source link

September 24, 2026

Featured in

AI Lawyer Finder

© 2025 Michigan Top Lawyers. All Rights Reserved. Powered by SolutionsPal | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service