Thompson & O'Neil

Add to Favorites

Claimed

Business Litigation Attorneys, Accident & Property Damage Attorneys, Adoption Law Attorneys

Be the first to review!

CLOSED NOW

Today: 8:00 am - 5:00 pm

Tomorrow: 8:00 am - 5:00 pm

30 Years

in Business

Accredited

Business

(231) 929-9700Visit WebsiteMap & Directions309 E Front StTraverse City, MI 49684 Write a Review

Hours

Regular Hours

Mon - Fri:	8:00 am - 5:00 pm

Places Near Traverse City with Business Litigation Attorneys

Acme (9 miles)
Chums Corner (11 miles)
Grawn (13 miles)

More Info

Email

BBB Rating

Brands

info@tovlaw.com

Location

Law Ctr

Other Links

http://www.thompsononeillaw.com

http://tovlaw.com

Social Links

Categories

Gallery

Be the first to add a photo!

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (231) 929-9700

Address: 309 E Front St, Traverse City, MI 49684

Website: http://www.thompsononeillaw.com

View similar Business Litigation Attorneys

Thompson & O'Neil

Divorce
Adoption

DUI/DWI
The Engler Majority reversed these holdings, however, and excluded expert toxicology testimony based on the drunk’s blood alcohol level, unless the intoxication was confirmed by an eyewitness. In other words, a neutral expert cannot confirm that a drunk was in fact drunk when he was last served at a bar or convenience store–even if his blood alcohol is sky-high, unless the victim’s family can also provide the testimony of an eyewitness to the sale. Not surprisingly, most servers and convenience store clerks won’t admit to an illegal sale (if they even remember it), and most drinking companions or “regulars” from one stool over, also won’t “rat out” their neighborhood tavern. Unless the drunk was drinking in the company of unrelated companions who weren’t close friends, it is almost impossible to provide the corroborating testimonial evidence required by the Engler Majority. As a result, numerous drunk-driving fatalities resulting from illegal sales to clearly-intoxicated individuals have gone uncompensated, despite clear statutory language requiring that the victims’ families be made whole.
Wrongful Death
Michigan law has a statute governing when someone can sue as a result of a wrongful death. All claims under this statute are brought by the Personal Representative of the decedent’s Estate after it is opened in the Probate Court. There are very few situations (dramshop claims and no fault PIP claims are the primary exceptions) where family members can bring a suit in their own name for damages suffered.
Drug Crimes
The reforming courts have drastically limited the basic product liability laws in a number of ways. For starters, in Michigan (and in no other state) drug manufacturers cannot be sued for an unsafe product if the drug was approved by the FDA. This rule obtains, even if it can be proven that the FDA approval was premised upon falsified or negligent drug testing or that the approval resulted from the failure to disclose known risks and complications to the FDA. It is especially ironic that FDA approval confers immunity on drug manufacturers in Michigan, since the FDA panels that usually grant such approval are routinely composed primarily of drug manufacturing representatives and doctors with grant-related interest in drug approval.
Arson
Whether the cause is arson, faulty wiring or improper handling of combustibles, a house fire is a catastrophe for the homeowners usually resulting in significant structural damage and loss of property. An appropriate policy of fire insurance is a must--and is a requirement if the property is mortgaged. All homeowners policies sold in Michigan must contain coverage for fire loss and state law requires that every fire insurance policy contains certain provisions spelling out obligations of both the insured and insurer in the event of a fire. This does not mean that all fire insurance policies are identical and it is very important that you discuss your particular coverage needs with a competent insurance agent and understand what your policy does and does not cover and what your responsibilities are in the event of a fire.
Hit and Run
Obviously, the same situation occurs where there is a “hit and run” car or truck. In these cases, preserving the evidence of the “phantom” motor vehicle may be essential to qualify for PIP benefits through the state assigned claims plan or through an insured’s UIM or UM policy.

Workers Compensation
When workers are hurt in an industrial setting, they almost always have access to workers compensation. At the turn of the 19th century, most states adopted “work comp” schemes to provide injured employees and their families some form of safety net. Before that time, workers could sue if they were hurt on the job, but almost all claims were defeated by the “unholy trinity” of defenses, each of which was a complete bar to any recovery: the defenses were comparative fault, the assumption of risk and the fellow servant rule. Basically, one of the three applied to protect an at-fault employer in almost every situation.
Wrongful Termination
Most employment rights statutes prohibit any unfair employment action, practice or discrimination, including failing to hire, failure to promote, the subjection of the employee to a hostile workplace environment, and of course wrongful discharge. The law has held that an employee who is subjected to an intolerable work environment is "constructively" discharged, even if it is the employee who finally terminates the employment relationship.
Employment Litigation
Under these statutes, employees usually enjoy the right a workplace free of mistreatment, financial penalty or unfair employment terms. On the other hand, under recent decisions, if the employer responds appropriately to a co-worker’s or supervisor’s improper conduct, it may be protected from liability. Further, most such employment litigation rights are curtailed if the employer extends a bona fide offer of re-employment to the victimized employee.
Sexual Harassment
Employees have the right to demand a copy of their personnel file. As noted, they also have the right to be free from illegal discrimination, sexual harassment or retaliation. Many of the latter rights have been significantly compressed and Michigan courts have also allowed employers a standing "excuse" based upon "legitimate business purpose".

Premises Liability
It is important to note at the outset that premises liability must be distinguished from active negligence. “Premises liability” is an obligation to the injured visitor that arises from the control of the property and from hazardous conditions which exist on the property. Negligence based upon a particular unsafe act that causes injury is a different issue governed by different rules focused upon “reasonably safe” behavior or negligent behavior.
Property Damage
Product liability law related to injuries must be distinguished from product liability for property damage or product failure. The Uniform Commercial Code has been the standardized law in most states for a quarter-century with respect to the liabilities of a seller of "goods" if there is no injury involved. The UCC allows most sellers and manufacturers of goods to limit their liability and warranty exposure to one year from the date of sale and to limit in writing the collectible damages. Liability for injuries is a separate issue and has not been made uniform from state to state.

Personal Injury
Under the law, you must purchase no-fault “personal injury protection benefits.” “[See page 5] If you do not buy this coverage, you will be responsible for all of your own medical expenses — even if the other driver is at fault, and you may not have the right to sue the “at fault.”
Medical Malpractice
We know that it is not easy to make a decision to look into a possible medical malpractice lawsuit. The law firm of Thompson O’Neil, P.C has the experience, the expertise, and the resources to help you with your decision and to stand by you throughout the legal process. We will consult with you and help you evaluate your potential claims at no charge.
Social Security Disability
As with most states, Michigan’s work comp scheme dropped the comparative fault, the assumption of risk and the fellow servant rule defenses. These three defenses in return for strict limitations on recovery against the employer. Employees were covered for any injury that occurred in an employment setting; however, the coverage was limited to the very basic necessities: usually medical coverage and two-thirds of net pay (less any Social Security Disability or other collateral sources). As a result, the family of an employee injured while at work will not starve, however, in many cases, they will be consigned to living just at the governmentally-defined poverty level. Even if the employer was guilty of “gross” negligence, the injured employee cannot supplement the work comp benefits with a lawsuit against the employer. The only exception to the employer’s work comp “immunity” is for injuries intentionally caused by the employer.
Dog Bites
Injuries involving dog bites, loose animals, or the service of alcohol are subject to very different rules, based upon statutes adopted to address those possible dangers. With respect to dog bites, for example, the dog owner is responsible for any bite that is not provoked by the injured victim. If the injury results from an attack or behavior that does not include “biting”, or if the victim prefers to seek redress for negligence, the person controlling the dog is judged by the broader, historical “reasonable care” standard.

Trusts and Estates

Probate

View All Services

Provided by