Case: Tesmer v. Granholm

1:00-cv-10082 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: March 2, 2000

Closed Date: 2005

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 1994, the Michigan State Constitution was amended to provide that a defendant who pled guilty would be allowed to appeal only by leave of court and not by right or as a matter of course. Following the amendment, some state judges engaged in the practice of denying the appointment of appellate counsel to indigent defendants who pled guilty. In 2000, the Legislature codified this practice by passing a statute which prohibited (with certain mandatory and permissive exceptions) the appointment…

In 1994, the Michigan State Constitution was amended to provide that a defendant who pled guilty would be allowed to appeal only by leave of court and not by right or as a matter of course. Following the amendment, some state judges engaged in the practice of denying the appointment of appellate counsel to indigent defendants who pled guilty. In 2000, the Legislature codified this practice by passing a statute which prohibited (with certain mandatory and permissive exceptions) the appointment of appellate counsel for indigent defendants who pled guilty. This statute was scheduled to go into effect on April 1, 2000.

On March 2, 2000, Plaintiffs filed this §1983 suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in order to challenge the constitutionality of the appointment procedure codified by the statute. The suit was filed against the state attorney general and three state judges. Plaintiffs included two attorneys and three indigent criminal defendants who had been denied appellate counsel after entering guilty pleas. Plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union Fund of Michigan, claimed that the appointment procedure was violative of the due process and equal protection clauses of the United States Constitution and sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the practice and the statute.

On March 23, 2000, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On March 31, 2000, one day before the statute was set to go into effect, the District Court (Judge Victoria A. Roberts) issued an order denying in part Defendants' motion to dismiss and declaring the challenged appointment practice and statute unconstitutional under the equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution. Tesmer v. Granholm, 114 F. Supp. 2d 603 (E.D Mich. 2000). The District Court did not, however, grant Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, stating that §1983 did not permit injunctive relief against judicial officers unless the officers had violated a declaratory decree. Tesmer v. Granholm, 114 F. Supp. 2d 603, 605 (E.D. Mich. 2000).

On May 9, 2000, Plaintiffs filed another motion for injunctive relief, this time arguing that state court judges had failed to abide by the District Court's March 31 declaratory decree. Also, by motion of March 30, 2000, the plaintiffs sought to certify a class of circuit court judges as defendants.

On June 30, 2000, the District Court (Judge Roberts) granted Plaintiffs motion for an injunction, stating that such injunction was necessary to enforce of its prior declaratory Order. The Court thereby enjoined Michigan state judges from denying appellate counsel to indigents who pleaded guilty. Tesmer v. Kowalski, 114 F. Supp. 2d 622 (E.D. Mich. 2000). The District Court denied, however, Plaintiffs' motion for certification of a defendant class on grounds that such certification would constitute expansion, and not mere enforcement, of its prior Order. Tesmer v. Kowalski, 114 F. Supp. 2d 622, 629 (E.D Mich. 2000).

On April 10, 2000, Defendants filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. On July 2, 2002, a panel of the Sixth Circuit (Judges Alice M. Batchelder, Alan E. Norris, and Eugene E. Siler, Jr.) issued an order reversing the District Court. Tesmer v. Granholm, 295 F. 3d 536 (6th Cir. 2002). The panel first held that Younger abstention barred suit by the indigent-plaintiffs but that the attorney-plaintiffs had third-party standing to assert the rights of the indigents. In turning to the merits of the suit, however, the panel held that the statute was constitutional.

On July 10, 2002, Plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing en banc. The plaintiffs' petition was granted by the Sixth Circuit on September 20, 2002. Tesmer v. Granholm, 307 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2002). On June 17, 2003, the en banc court issued an opinion reversing the panel decision. Tesmer v. Granholm, 333 F.3d 683 (6th Cir. 2003). The en banc court agreed with the panel that the attorney-plaintiffs had standing, but concluded that reversal was nevertheless appropriate because the statute was, in fact, unconstitutional. Tesmer v. Granholm, 333 F.3d 683, 686 (6th Cir. 2003).

On January 20, 2004, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. Kowalski v. Tesmer, 540 U.S. 1148 (2004). On December 13, 2004, the Supreme Court reversed the en banc decision of the Sixth Circuit. Kowalski v. Tesmer, 543 U.S. 125 (2004). The Court resolved the matter by concluding that the attorney-plaintiffs lacked standing and, therefore, did not reach the question of whether the practice and statute were constitutional.

On April 21, 2005, the suit was finally dismissed.

Summary Authors

Vidhya Reddy (2/12/2008)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/2213886/parties/tesmer-v-granholm/

Judge(s)

Batchelder, Alice Moore (Ohio)

Boggs, Danny Julian (Kentucky)

Breyer, Stephen Gerald (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Bregman, Judy E. (Michigan)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Berlanga, Michael (Michigan)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

1:00-cv-10082

Docket [PACER]

May 12, 2005

May 12, 2005

Docket
17

1:00-cv-10082

District Court Opinion and Order [Entering Declaratory Judgment]

March 31, 2000

March 31, 2000

Order/Opinion

114 F.Supp.2d 603

33

1:00-cv-10082

District Court Opinion and Order Granting Injunction and Denying Class Certification

June 30, 2000

June 30, 2000

Order/Opinion

114 F.Supp.2d 622

00-01824

00-01845

Opinion of Sixth Circuit Panel [Reversing District Court]

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

July 2, 2002

July 2, 2002

Order/Opinion

295 F.3d 536

1:00-cv-10082

Plaintiffs' Petition for Sixth Circuit Rehearing En Banc

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

July 10, 2002

July 10, 2002

Pleading / Motion / Brief

00-01824

00-01845

Order of Sixth Circuit Granting Rehearing En Banc

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Sept. 20, 2002

Sept. 20, 2002

Order/Opinion

307 F.3d 459

00-01824

00-01845

Sixth Circuit En Banc Opinion Reversing Sixth Circuit Panel

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

June 17, 2003

June 17, 2003

Order/Opinion

333 F.3d 683

03-00407

[Untitled]

Kowalski v. Tesmer

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 20, 2004

Jan. 20, 2004

Order/Opinion

540 U.S. 1148

03-00407

Opinion of the US Supreme Court [Reversing Sixth Circuit]

Kowalski v. Tesmer

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 13, 2004

Dec. 13, 2004

Order/Opinion

543 U.S. 125

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/2213886/tesmer-v-granholm/

Last updated March 24, 2026, 5:05 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 March 2, 2000

COMPLAINT - Receipt # 395248 - Date Fee Received: 03/02/00 (bs) (Entered: 03/06/2000)

RECAP
2 March 2, 2000

MOTION by plaintiffs for preliminary injunction with Exhibits, brief, notice of hearing with date to be set by the court and proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 03/06/2000)

RECAP
3 March 14, 2000

SUMMONS returned executed by certified mail on 3/6/00 - answer due 3/26/00 for John F. Kowalski (bs) (Entered: 03/16/2000)

RECAP
4 March 14, 2000

SUMMONS returned executed by certified mail on 3/6/00 - answer due 3/26/00 for William A. Crane (bs) (Entered: 03/16/2000)

RECAP
5 March 14, 2000

SUMMONS returned executed by certified mail on 3/6/00 - answer due 3/26/00 for Lynda L. Heathscott (bs) (Entered: 03/16/2000)

RECAP
6 March 23, 2000

MOTION by defendants to dismiss (bs) (Entered: 03/23/2000)

RECAP
7 March 23, 2000

MEMORANDUM by defendants in support of motion to dismiss [6-1], with attachments. (bs) (Entered: 03/23/2000)

RECAP
8 March 23, 2000

NOTICE by defendants of hearing on motion to dismiss by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski, Jennifer M. Granholm [6-1], date to be set by court (bs) (Entered: 03/23/2000)

RECAP
9 March 23, 2000

PROOF of mailing by defendants copy of motion to dismiss, brief in support and notice of hearing. (bs) (Entered: 03/23/2000)

RECAP
10 March 27, 2000

MEMORANDUM by defendant Jennifer M. Granholm in opposition to motion for preliminary injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [2-1], with proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 03/27/2000)

RECAP
11 March 27, 2000

LETTER by defendant Jennifer M. Granholm, with the Issues Presented and Controlling Authorities regarding 03/22/00 filing of defendant's Motion to Dismiss with brief in support. (bs) (Entered: 03/27/2000)

RECAP
13 March 27, 2000

RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski, Jennifer M. Granholm [6-1] with brief and attachments. (bs) (Entered: 03/29/2000)

RECAP
12 March 28, 2000

APPEARANCE for Jennifer M. Granholm, John F. Kowalski, William A. Crane, Lynda L. Heathscott of attorney Thomas Wheeler (jl) (Entered: 03/28/2000)

RECAP
14 March 28, 2000

REMARK: Supplemental Authority with Exhibit A filed by plaintiffs. (bs) (Entered: 03/30/2000)

RECAP
15 March 30, 2000

ANSWER by defendants to remark [14-1] (Supplemental Authority), with proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 03/30/2000)

RECAP
16 March 30, 2000

REPLY by defendants to response to motion to dismiss by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski, Jennifer M. Granholm [6-1] with proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 03/30/2000)

RECAP
18 March 30, 2000

MOTION by plaintiffs to certify class action with brief, attachment, notice of hearing with date to be set by the court and proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 04/05/2000)

RECAP
March 30, 2000

MOTION hearing held on motion for preliminary injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [2-1] - disposition: Opinion to issue - Judge Victoria A. Roberts - Court Reporter: Shawn Quinn (cp)

17 March 31, 2000

MEMORANDUM opinion and order by Judge Victoria A. Roberts granting in part and denying in part motion to dismiss by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski, Jennifer M. Granholm [6-1], denying motion for preliminary injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [2-1] and granting plaintiffs' request for declaratory judgment [EOD Date: 4/4/00] (bs) (Entered: 04/04/2000)

RECAP
19 April 10, 2000

APPEAL by defendant John F. Kowalski, defendant William A. Crane, defendant Lynda L. Heathscott of order [17-1] to USCA - FEE: paid - Receipt #: 14500 (bs) (Entered: 04/10/2000)

RECAP
20 April 10, 2000

CERTIFIED copy of appeal notice by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [19-1] and docket transmitted to USCA (bs) (Entered: 04/10/2000)

RECAP
21 April 10, 2000

NOTICE by the clerk regarding designation of record on appeal, mailed to counsel of record. (bs) (Entered: 04/10/2000)

RECAP
22 April 10, 2000

PROOF of mailing notice of appeal by USDC to U.S. Court of appeals and counsel of record (bs) (Entered: 04/10/2000)

RECAP
23 April 13, 2000

SUMMONS returned executed by certified mail on 3/24/00 - answer due 4/13/00 for Jennifer M. Granholm (jl) (Entered: 04/14/2000)

RECAP
24 April 14, 2000

MOTION by defendant John F. Kowalski, defendant William A. Crane, defendant Lynda L. Heathscott to stay case with brief, attachments and proof of mailing (jl) (Entered: 04/14/2000)

RECAP
25 April 24, 2000

TRANSCRIPT order form by defendants regarding appeal notice by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [19-1] requesting transcript(s) of: 03/30/00 (bs) (Entered: 04/24/2000)

RECAP
26 April 24, 2000

DESIGNATION of record by defendant for appeal notice by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [19-1] (bs) (Entered: 04/24/2000)

RECAP
27 April 25, 2000

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT from USCA of receipt of appeal notice of appeal & docket [20-1] - appeal case # 00-1405 (jl) (Entered: 04/25/2000)

RECAP
28 April 27, 2000

MEMORANDUM by plaintiffs in opposition to motion to stay case by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [24-1]; with attachments and proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 05/01/2000)

RECAP
29 May 9, 2000

MOTION by plaintiff for injunction with brief, exhibits, notice of hearing and proof of mailing (jl) (Entered: 05/11/2000)

RECAP
30 May 24, 2000

RESPONSE by defendant to motion for injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [29-1] with attachment (jl) (Entered: 05/24/2000)

RECAP
31 June 20, 2000

ORDER by Judge Victoria A. Roberts denying motion to stay case by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [24-1], setting hearing on motion for injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [29-1] for 10:00 6/28/00, and setting deadline for plaintiff's supplemental brief for 10:00 6/23/00, setting deadline for defendant's supplemental brief for 10:00 6/26/00 Date 6/22/00] (jl) (Entered: 06/22/2000)

RECAP
32 June 23, 2000

SUPPLEMENTAL brief by plaintiff motion for injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [29-1], with attachment and proof. (bs) (Entered: 06/26/2000)

RECAP
June 28, 2000

MOTION hearing held on motion for injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [29-1] - Judge Victoria A. Roberts - Court Reporter: Barbara Chatman (cp)

33 June 30, 2000

MEMORANDUM opinion and order by Judge Victoria A. Roberts granting motion for injunction by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [29-1], denying motion to certify class action by Michael D. Vogler, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Alois Schnell, Charles Carter, John Tesmer [18-1]; with proof of mailing. [EOD Date: 7/3/00] (bs) (Entered: 07/03/2000)

RECAP
35 July 14, 2000

INTERLOCUTORY appeal by defendant Lynda L. Heathscott, defendant William A. Crane, defendant John F. Kowalski of order [33-1] to USCA FEE: paid Receipt # 200 402249 (bs) Modified on 11/29/2001 (Entered: 11/29/2001)

RECAP
34 July 17, 2000

CERTIFIED copy of order from USCA denying motion to amend the notice of appeal, denying motion for stay pending appeal and granting motion to dismiss [0-0] - appeal case # 00-1405 (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2000)

RECAP
36 July 17, 2000

CERTIFIED copy of appeal notice by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [35-1] and docket transmitted to USCA (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2000)

RECAP
37 July 17, 2000

NOTICE regarding designation of record on appeal (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2000)

RECAP
38 July 17, 2000

PROOF of mailing notice of appeal to USCA and counsel of record (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2000)

RECAP
39 July 18, 2000

INTERLOCUTORY appeal of order [33-1] by the Honorable Dennis C. Kolenda to USCA FEE: paid Receipt # 200 402379 (bs) (Entered: 11/29/2001)

RECAP
40 July 21, 2000

CERTIFIED copy of appeal notice [39-1] and docket transmitted to USCA (bs) (Entered: 07/21/2000)

RECAP
41 July 21, 2000

NOTICE RE: designation of record on appeal (bs) (Entered: 07/21/2000)

RECAP
42 July 21, 2000

PROOF of mailing notice of appeal to USCA and counsel of record (bs) (Entered: 07/21/2000)

RECAP
43 July 27, 2000

TRANSCRIPT order form by defendants regarding appeal notice [39-1] requesting transcript(s) of: June 28, 2000 (bs) (Entered: 07/27/2000)

RECAP
44 July 27, 2000

DESIGNATION of record by defendants for appeal notice [39-1] (bs) (Entered: 07/27/2000)

RECAP
45 Aug. 3, 2000

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT from USCA of receipt of appeal notice [39-1] Honorable Dennis C. Kolenda - appeal case # 00-1845 (bs) (Entered: 08/03/2000)

RECAP
46 Aug. 15, 2000

TRANSCRIPT order form regarding appeal notice [39-1] requesting transcript(s) of: 03/30/00 -appeal case # 00-1845 (bs) (Entered: 08/21/2000)

RECAP
47 Aug. 15, 2000

TRANSCRIPT order form regarding appeal notice [39-1] requesting transcript(s) of: 06/28/00 -appeal case # 00-1845 (bs) (Entered: 08/21/2000)

RECAP
48 Aug. 21, 2000

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT from USCA of receipt of appeal notice by Lynda L. Heathscott, William A. Crane, John F. Kowalski [35-1] - appeal case # 00-1824 (bs) (Entered: 08/21/2000)

RECAP
49 Aug. 28, 2000

TRANSCRIPT taken on 06/30/00 of motion hearing (bs) (Entered: 08/29/2000)

RECAP
50 Sept. 29, 2000

MOTION by movant Dennis Erdman to intervene with affidavit and proof of mailing (jl) (Entered: 10/03/2000)

RECAP
51 Nov. 6, 2000

CERTIFIED copy of order from USCA granting motion for stay pending appeal [0-0] - appeal case # 00-1845 and the 06/30/00, injunction against Judge Kolenda is stayed (bs) (Entered: 11/06/2000)

RECAP
52 Dec. 6, 2000

MOTION by plaintiffs to certify class action with brief, attachments, notice of hearing and proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 12/06/2000)

RECAP
53 Dec. 11, 2000

MANDATE from USCA denying motion to amend, denying motion for stay of appeal and granting motion to dismiss [0-0] - appeal case # 00-1405 (bs) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

RECAP
54 Jan. 8, 2001

RESPONSE by defendants to motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [52-1] with proof of mailing. (bs) (Entered: 01/08/2001)

RECAP
55 Jan. 31, 2001

STIPULATION by defendants, plaintiffs, to supplement district court record [EOD Date: 1/31/01] (bs) (Entered: 01/31/2001)

RECAP
56 Jan. 31, 2001

TRANSCRIPT taken on 03/20/00 of preliminary injunction hearing (bs) (Entered: 01/31/2001)

RECAP
57 Aug. 3, 2001

NOTICE by plaintiffs counsel of change of address (bs) (Entered: 08/07/2001)

RECAP
58 Nov. 27, 2001

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson staying motion to intervene by Dennis Erdman [50-1], staying motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [52-1]; pending decision on the interlocutory appeals [EOD Date 11/28/01] (bs) (Entered: 11/28/2001)

RECAP
59 Dec. 20, 2001

SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT by movant Dennis Erdman (bs) (Entered: 12/20/2001)

RECAP
60 Dec. 20, 2001

NOTICE by movant Dennis Erdman of change of address (bs) (Entered: 12/20/2001)

RECAP
61 March 28, 2002

MOTION to intervene by Michael Berlanga with affidavit. (bs) (Entered: 03/28/2002)

RECAP
62 April 4, 2002

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson denying motion to intervene by Michael Berlanga [61-1], denying motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [52-1] [EOD Date 4/4/02] (bs) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

RECAP
63 July 8, 2002

SLIP opinion from USCA remanding the case for to have judgment entered in favor of the defendants, injunction issued by the court is dissolved and the declaratory judgment is vacated - appeal case # 00-1824, 00-1845 (bs) (Entered: 07/08/2002)

RECAP
64 March 27, 2003

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson, for plaintiffs to show cause in writing on or before 04/07/03, why judgment should not be entered in favor of the defendants [EOD Date 3/27/03] (bs) (Entered: 03/27/2003)

RECAP
65 April 14, 2003

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson dismissing order for plaintiffs to show cause in writing on or before 04/07/03, why judgment should not be entered in favor of the defendants [64-1], dismissing order [64-2] [EOD Date 4/14/03] (bs) (Entered: 04/14/2003)

RECAP
66 June 20, 2003

SLIP opinion from USCA affirming in part and reversing in part the decision of the District Court - appeal case # 00-1824/1845 (bs) (Entered: 06/20/2003)

RECAP
67 June 24, 2003

NON-CERTIFIED copy of order from USCA affirming the decision of the District Court in part and reversed in part - appeal case # 00-1824,00-1845 (cg) (Entered: 06/24/2003)

RECAP
68 July 14, 2003

MANDATE from USCA affirming the decision of the District Court in part and reversed in part - appeal case # 00-1824 (bs) (Entered: 07/14/2003)

RECAP
69 July 14, 2003

MANDATE from USCA affirming the decision of the District Court in part and reversed in part - appeal case # 00-1845 (bs) (Entered: 07/14/2003)

RECAP
70 Sept. 12, 2003

NOTICE of setting civil status conference for 3:30 10/2/03 (bs) (Entered: 09/15/2003)

RECAP
71 Sept. 22, 2003

COPY of notice setting civil status conference for 3:30 10/2/03 [70-1] and returned as undeliverable as to Mark Granzotto, Esquire. Remailed 09/22/03 (bs) (Entered: 09/22/2003)

RECAP
72 Sept. 26, 2003

SUBSTITUTION for defendant Lynda L. Heathscott, defendant William A. Crane, defendant John F. Kowalski of attorney Margaret A. Nelson in place of attorney Thomas R. Wheeker for John F. Kowalski, attorney Thomas R. Wheeker for William A. Crane, attorney Thomas R. Wheeker for Lynda L. Heathscott (cg) (Entered: 09/26/2003)

RECAP
73 Sept. 26, 2003

[STRICKEN PER ORDER 10/02/03]MOTION by defendant Lynda L. Heathscott, defendant William A. Crane, defendant John F. Kowalski to stay case during their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court with attachment and notice of hearing (cg) Modified on 10/03/2003 (Entered: 09/26/2003)

RECAP
74 Sept. 26, 2003

PROOF of service by defendant Lynda L. Heathscott, defendant William A. Crane, defendant John F. Kowalski of [73-1], [72-1] (cg) (Entered: 09/26/2003)

RECAP
75 Sept. 30, 2003

NOTICE from the US Supreme Court that a petition for writ of certiorari was filed and placed on the docket on 9/16/03 as No. 03-407. (bs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)

RECAP
76 Oct. 2, 2003

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson striking motion to stay case during their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court by John F. Kowalski, William A. Crane, Lynda L. Heathscott [73-1] [EOD Date 10/3/03] (bs) (Entered: 10/03/2003)

RECAP
Oct. 2, 2003

STATUS conference held - Judge David M. Lawson (tj)

77 Oct. 3, 2003

(STRICKEN PER ORDER 10/06/03) MOTION to withdraw by Jeanice Dagher-Margosian as attorney for Charles Carter with proof of service. (bs) Modified on 10/07/2003 (Entered: 10/03/2003)

RECAP
78 Oct. 6, 2003

ORDER by Judge David M. Lawson striking motion to withdraw by Jeanice Dagher-Margosian as attorney for Charles Carter by Jeanice Dagher-Margosian [77-1] [EOD Date 10/7/03] (bs) (Entered: 10/07/2003)

RECAP
79 Oct. 15, 2003

ORDER PURSUANT TO STATUS AND SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge David M. Lawson, setting deadline for filing renewed motion for class certification 10/23/03, setting deadline for response to class certification for 11/26/03 [EOD Date 10/15/03] (bs) (Entered: 10/15/2003)

RECAP
80 Oct. 23, 2003

REMEWED MOTION by plaintiffs to certify class action brief and proof. (bs) (Entered: 10/27/2003)

RECAP
81 Oct. 23, 2003

NOTICE by plaintiffs of hearing on renewed motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [80-1], date to be set by court (bs) (Entered: 10/27/2003)

RECAP
82 Nov. 26, 2003

RESPONSE by defendants to motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [80-1] with brief and proof. (bs) (Entered: 12/03/2003)

RECAP
83 Dec. 15, 2003

NOTICE of setting hearing on motion to certify class action by John Tesmer, Charles Carter, Alois Schnell, Arthur M. Fitzgerald, Michael D. Vogler [80-1] for 2:30 3/17/04 (bs) (Entered: 12/16/2003)

RECAP
84 Jan. 26, 2004

Letter from Clerk, U.S. Supreme Court advising that the petition for writ of certiorari has been granted (JLam, ) (Entered: 01/29/2004)

RECAP
85 Feb. 5, 2004

ORDER dismissing 80 Motion to Certify Class and cancelling hearing. Signed by Judge David M Lawson. (JLam, ) (Entered: 02/05/2004)

RECAP
July 27, 2004

Remark : Notification from USCA advising clerk's office to forward record to the Supreme Court. (BSoc, )

86 July 28, 2004

Letter with record forwarded to U. S. Supreme Court. Two Volumes of Pleadings and Two Transcripts. (BSoc, ) Modified on 7/28/2004 (BSoc, ). (Entered: 07/28/2004)

RECAP
87 Aug. 12, 2004

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT from U.S. Supreme Court of 86 Letter. (JLam, ) (Entered: 08/12/2004)

RECAP
88 Dec. 21, 2004

Letter from the Supreme Court, with attached opinion, No. 03-407. (BSoc, ) (Entered: 12/21/2004)

RECAP
89 Feb. 15, 2005

LETTER from USCA re 19 Notice of Appeal filed by William A. Crane,, John F. Kowalski,, Lynda L. Heathscott, - with attached copy of Supreme Court Judgment filed 01/24/05 [Appeal Case Number 00-1824/25] (BSoc, ) (Entered: 02/15/2005)

RECAP
90 March 1, 2005

(Certified) ORDER from USCA re 35 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by William A. Crane,, John F. Kowalski,, Lynda L. Heathscott,, 39 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal Reverse and Remand [Appeal Case Number 00-1824/1845] (BSoc, ) (Entered: 03/01/2005)

RECAP
91 March 16, 2005

Letter from Supreme Court. (BSoc, ) (Entered: 03/18/2005)

RECAP
92 April 21, 2005

ORDER of Dismissal pursuant to 90 Order from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Signed by Honorable David M Lawson. (TJac, ) (Entered: 04/22/2005)

RECAP
93 May 12, 2005

Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Michael Berlanga re 92 Order (BSoc, ) (Entered: 05/13/2005)

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory:

Michigan

Case Type(s):

Indigent Defense

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 2, 2000

Closing Date: 2005

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Prison inmates claiming alleging violation of their rights to dueprocess and equal protection and violation in denying indigents the appointment of counsel to prepare original appeals from their plea-based convictions

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State

State of Michigan

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Equal Protection

Other Dockets:

Eastern District of Michigan 1:00-cv-10082

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 00-01824

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 00-01845

Supreme Court of the United States 03-407

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Trial Court Docket

U.S. Supreme Court merits opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Relief Granted:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Recommended Citation