Legal Opinion · Dissent

Grievance Administrator v. Fieger

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 2006No. 127547Published

1DissentCavanagh, J.

I would grant the motion for a stay of proceedings. As discussed in my dissent in Grievance Administrator v Fieger, 476 Mich 231 (2006), I believe that the majority violated attorney Geoffrey Fieger’s First Amendment rights when it held that his com*1230ments were not political speech protected by the United States and Michigan constitutions. Geoffrey Fieger is raising this issue in his petition to the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, as well as raising the matter of how judicial disqualifications are handled by our Court. Because I believe that our current disqualification…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Pickering v. Board of Ed. of Township High School Dist. 205, Will Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  3. Republican Party of Minnesota v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Johnson v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. City of Grosse Pointe Park v. Michigan Municipal Liability & Property PoolMichigan Supreme Court · 2005

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API