MI Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Plaintiff – Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians

January 28, 2010

In case of Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Bernard Bouschor; and Miller Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C.; Daniel T. Green; Paul W. Shagen; Joseph M. Paczkowski; David E. Scott; Jolene M. Nertoli; James M. Jannetta; Daniel J. Weaver, jointly and severally

C/A Case No.: 276712 – L/C Case No.: 04-7606-CC

Lansing, MI – Today, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians in the so-called 7+1+1 case which was originally filed in Chippewa County (50th Circuit Court) but presented to Judge Charles Johnson, 57th Circuit Court, in Emmet County as visiting judge when Judge Lambros recused himself.

At the lower court level, Judge Johnson ruled back in 2007, that the defendants were not terminated, that Bouschor did not have the authority to grant severances (in the amount exceeding $2.66 million), and that contrary to Bouschor’s claim, Bouschor did not hold ‘executive immunity’ a status typically held for State Governors or the President of the United States. This latter filing by Bouschor is what qualified the defendants for an automatic appeal in the Michigan Court of Appeals and has delayed the case since the initially filing in 2004. At that level, the MI Court of Appeals threw out the legal malpractice and conspiracy claim.

The MI Supreme Court’s ruling today reinstates the Sault Tribe’s complaint with regard to malpractice and may qualify the Sault Tribe for injunctive relief to recover not only the amount Bouschor and defendants conspired to take on election night of 2004, but also ‘treble damages’ which is up to three times the amount. Given the Tribe filed jointly and severally, once a final judgment is granted (possibly via a summary disposition given there now appear to be no facts in dispute) there may not even be a need to go to trial at the district court level. Judge Johnson could, instead, rule in the Tribe’s favor and award damages and legal fees.

In the Supreme Court’s ruling, the justices ruled that Bernard Bouschor did not have executive immunity and as such, reinforced Judge Johnson’s earlier ruling that Bouschor is individually liable in this case. If Judge Johnson does not grant a summary disposition judgment, the case will go to trial in the 50th Circuit Court with Judge Johnson presiding as visiting judge. In a prepared statement, former Chairperson Aaron Payment said,

“With all of the legal wrangling by Bouschor and the defendants over the last 5 ½ years, it is no wonder tribal members are dispirited. The rulings by the MI Supreme Court and the prosecution of Paquin give tribal members hope that the rule of law will prevail and justice will be served. Those who would steal from their own people, need to be held accountable. Maybe 2010 will be the year of tribal justice!

SUPREME COURT RULING HERE