Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – September 6, 2024

  1. Michigan “Homeowner’s Energy Policy Act” Signed Into Law

Earlier this summer, the Michigan legislature passed and Governor Whitmer signed into law, the “Homeowner’s Energy Policy Act,” which will prohibit homeowners’ associations from banning certain energy-saving home improvements. A few of the improvements that can’t be prohibited by HOAs (subject to certain conditions) under the law include: solar panels, rain barrels, energy efficient appliances, solar water heaters, electric vehicle supply equipment, and energy-efficient windows.

Why it Matters: The new law will take effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns. Accordingly, the effective date will likely be in early 2025.

———

  1. Fraser Trebilcock Lawyers Selected Among “The Best Lawyers in America©” 2025 Edition in Lansing

Fraser Trebilcock is proud to announce that 12 attorneys from the firm have been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025 edition in Lansing. Those selected include: Michael S. Ashton, Administrative / Regulatory Law; Litigation – Regulatory Enforcement (SEC, Telecom, Energy); Utilities Law; Douglas J. Austin, Real Estate Law; Michael E. Cavanaugh, Administrative / Regulatory Law; Bet-the-Company Litigation; Commercial Litigation; Litigation – Labor and Employment; Michael P. Donnelly, Commercial Litigation; Sean P. Gallagher, Environmental Law; Litigation – Environmental; Jennifer Utter Heston, Administrative / Regulatory Law; Mark E. Kellogg, Closely Held Companies and Family Business Law; Corporate Law; Hon. Paula J. Manderfield (Ret.), Mediation; Thaddeus E. Morgan, Commercial Litigation; Litigation – Construction; Michael H. Perry, Environmental Law; Gary C. Rogers, Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation – Insurance; and Marlaine C. Teahan, Trusts and Estates.

Why it Matters: “These twelve attorneys are proven leaders in their field, and practice at a very high level. We congratulate them on this recognition by  Best Lawyers®,” said Thaddeus E. Morgan, President of Fraser Trebilcock. Read more.

———

  1. Attorney Douglas J. Austin Honored as “Lawyer of the Year” in Real Estate Law in Lansing

Fraser Trebilcock attorney Douglas J. Austin has been named the Best Lawyers in America® 2025 Real Estate Law “Lawyer of the Year” in Lansing. “I am honored to be recognized by Best Lawyers® as a 2025 ‘Lawyer of the Year’ for Real Estate Law in Lansing,” said Mr. Austin.

Why it Matters: This is a high distinction, as only one attorney in each practice area in each community is identified as “Lawyer of the Year.” Mr. Austin has been at the center of real estate law for over 45 years. In addition to being a shareholder at Fraser Trebilcock, he is also the past chair of the firm’s Real Estate Law department.

———

  1. Intellectual Property and Rebranding: What Business Leaders Need to Know

Rebranding a business is exciting. It’s often done at a time of growth and transformation, such as a merger or acquisition, when a business is launching an important new product, entering a new geographic market, or trying to appeal to a new customer demographic. Whether you’re updating your logo, changing your company name, or overhauling your entire brand identity, it’s a big step that can lead to great opportunities.

Why it Matters: But before you dive into the creative process, it is crucial to consider the intellectual property (IP) law implications of a rebrand. Your brand is one of your most valuable assets, and rebranding involves important legal considerations that can impact your business’s future. In this article, we’ll walk you through some key IP issues you need to consider when rebranding. These considerations will help you protect your new identity and avoid costly legal pitfalls along the way. Read more.

———

  1. FTC Non-Compete Prohibition on Hold Again

Briefly, the FTC issued a Final Rule, scheduled to go into effect on September 4, 2024, placing limitations on non-compete and related employer contracts or policies. That rule has been reviewed by three courts. Previously, the Northern District of Texas invalidated the rule as beyond the authority of the FTC to issue, but issued an injunction barring enforcement of the rule only with respect to the parties to that litigation.

Why it Matters: U.S. District Judge Ada Brown, sitting in the Northern District Court in  Texas, has now held the rule invalid as “arbitrary and capricious.” In comparison to her first ruling, however, this court issued a national injunctive order barring enforcement of the rule in all United States federal court jurisdiction. Ryan LLC v. FTC. LINK. As a result, employers are not required to follow the Final Rule. The duration of this order and status is unknown, but can be expected to be several months or longer, or possibly permanent. Read more.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Energy, Utilities & Telecommunication | Sean Gallagher
Real Estate Law | Doug Austin
Intellectual Property | Andrew Martin
Labor, Employment & Civil Rights | David Houston
Business & Tax | Andrew Martin

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – August 30, 2024

  1. Cannabis Regulatory Agency Releases Disciplinary Schedule

The CRA recently released a “disciplinary schedule” of different types of marijuana business violations and the corresponding fines and other penalties. The schedule comes, as reported by Crain’s Detroit Business, following complaints from the cannabis industry in Michigan about “uneven and arbitrary disciplinary actions.

Why it Matters: The schedule provides more clarity about the impact of taking or failing to take certain actions required to operate a licensed cannabis business in Michigan, such as a $10,000 fine for failing to submit required financial statements to the state in a timely manner.

———

  1. FTC Non-Compete Prohibition on Hold Again

Briefly, the FTC issued a Final Rule, scheduled to go into effect on September 4, 2024, placing limitations on non-compete and related employer contracts or policies. That rule has been reviewed by three courts. Previously, the Northern District of Texas invalidated the rule as beyond the authority of the FTC to issue, but issued an injunction barring enforcement of the rule only with respect to the parties to that litigation.

Why it Matters: U.S. District Judge Ada Brown, sitting in the Northern District Court in  Texas, has now held the rule invalid as “arbitrary and capricious.” In comparison to her first ruling, however, this court issued a national injunctive order barring enforcement of the rule in all United States federal court jurisdiction. Ryan LLC v. FTC. LINK. As a result, employers are not required to follow the Final Rule. The duration of this order and status is unknown, but can be expected to be several months or longer, or possibly permanent.

———

  1. Intellectual Property and Rebranding: What Business Leaders Need to Know

Rebranding a business is exciting. It’s often done at a time of growth and transformation, such as a merger or acquisition, when a business is launching an important new product, entering a new geographic market, or trying to appeal to a new customer demographic. Whether you’re updating your logo, changing your company name, or overhauling your entire brand identity, it’s a big step that can lead to great opportunities.

Why it Matters: But before you dive into the creative process, it is crucial to consider the intellectual property (IP) law implications of a rebrand. Your brand is one of your most valuable assets, and rebranding involves important legal considerations that can impact your business’s future. In this article, we’ll walk you through some key IP issues you need to consider when rebranding. These considerations will help you protect your new identity and avoid costly legal pitfalls along the way. Read more.

———

  1. Strategic Alliance Announced Between Fraser Trebilcock and Cheltenham Law

Fraser Trebilcock Davis Dunlap & Cavanaugh P.C. is excited to announce a strategic alliance with Cheltenham Law, PLLC. As both firms have a strong presence in the Greater Lansing and Detroit regions, this collaboration brings together two prominent law firms seeking to strengthen their opportunities in Michigan.

Why it Matters: Cheltenham Law offers clients the full spectrum of legal representation and guidance in matters such as divorce, custody, criminal defense, and estate planning. This arrangement allows Fraser Trebilcock to use its knowledge and expertise in the areas of family law, criminal defense, and estate planning, among others, to enhance its presence in the Greater Lansing and Detroit regions. Read more.

———

  1. Fraser Trebilcock Welcomes John R. Fifarek to the Firm

On May 20, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to initiate the proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II under the Controlled Substance Act. A 60-day public comment period then began, which ended in late July.

Why it Matters: Following the end of the public comment period, the DEA will review the public comments, may incorporate comments as appropriate, and then finalize the rescheduling rule. Typically, a final rule becomes effective 30 days after being published in the Federal Register.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher
Labor, Employment & Civil Rights | David Houston
Business & Tax | Andrew Martin
Intellectual Property | Andrew Martin
John Fifarek

Intellectual Property and Rebranding: What Business Leaders Need to Know

Rebranding a business is exciting. It’s often done at a time of growth and transformation, such as a merger or acquisition, when a business is launching an important new product, entering a new geographic market, or trying to appeal to a new customer demographic. Whether you’re updating your logo, changing your company name, or overhauling your entire brand identity, it’s a big step that can lead to great opportunities.

But before you dive into the creative process, it is crucial to consider the intellectual property (IP) law implications of a rebrand. Your brand is one of your most valuable assets, and rebranding involves important legal considerations that can impact your business’s future. In this article, we’ll walk you through some key IP issues you need to consider when rebranding. These considerations will help you protect your new identity and avoid costly legal pitfalls along the way.

Protecting Your Brand During Rebranding

Intellectual property laws give you the legal right to protect unique aspects of your brand, like your company name, logo, as well as your product designs. When you rebrand, you need to make sure your new brand elements are protected just like your old ones were. This means registering new trademarks, updating copyright protections, and making sure you’re not accidentally stepping on someone else’s IP toes.

Why is this so important? Well, imagine spending tens of thousands—or even millions in the case of a large company—on a rebrand, only to find out another company is already using a similar name or logo. You may have to modify your new brand to avoid confusion in the marketplace; or worse you could be sued for trademark infringement if your new brand is too similar to an existing one. These scenarios aren’t just headaches—they can be expensive setbacks that undo all your rebranding efforts. Even large, sophisticated companies make rebranding mistakes because they don’t invest enough time and resources into IP issues.

Accordingly, by paying attention to IP during your rebrand, you’re not just following the law—you’re protecting your investment and ensuring your new brand can grow and thrive without legal obstacles. Now let’s address some of the specific steps you can take to safeguard your new brand identity.

Preparing for Your Rebrand

Before you call in the creative team to start dreaming up new logos or catchy slogans, it’s crucial to lay some groundwork. This preparation phase can save you time, money, and potential legal trouble down the road.

First, conduct a brand audit. Take a close look at your current brand. What elements are working well? Which ones need a refresh? This isn’t just about aesthetics—it’s about understanding the legal protections you already have in place. Make a list of all your registered trademarks, copyrights, and other IP assets. This might include your company name, logo, product names, slogans, and even distinctive packaging designs.

Next, review your current IP assets. Are all your registrations up to date? Have you been using all the trademarks you’ve registered? If not, you might risk losing those protections. This is also a good time to think about any unregistered trademarks you might be using—elements of your brand that you’ve been using but haven’t officially registered.

While you’re at it, consider your market position and your competitors. Are there any areas where your brand might be conflicting with others in your industry? Understanding this landscape can help guide your rebranding decisions and highlight potential legal issues before they become problems.

This preparatory phase helps set the stage for a successful rebrand. By understanding what you have and what you need, you’ll be in a much better position to create a new brand identity that’s both compelling and legally sound.

Trademark Considerations

Trademarks are what legally protect your brand name, logo, and other distinctive elements of your business identity. So, as you’re developing your new brand, you need to think carefully about how you protect and enforce them.

Before you fall in love with a new name or logo, do your homework. Conduct a thorough trademark search. This isn’t just a quick Google search or a scan of your competitors’ websites. You need to check trademark databases, including the USPTO’s database for federal trademarks. Don’t forget to look for similar names or logos, not just exact matches. A name doesn’t have to be identical to cause legal problems—if it’s similar enough to confuse consumers, it could be an issue and lead to a trademark infringement lawsuit. That’s a headache you definitely want to avoid. It could force you to abandon your new brand and start over, wasting all the time and money you’ve invested.

When choosing your new brand elements, aim for something distinctive. The more unique your name, logo, or slogan is, the easier it will be to protect legally. Generic or descriptive terms are harder to trademark, while arbitrary or original words offer stronger protection.

Once you’ve settled on your new brand elements, file for trademark registration. In the U.S., trademark rights are generally based on use, but registering gives you important additional protections. It puts others on notice that you’re claiming rights to that mark, and it can be crucial if you ever need to enforce your rights. Working with experienced IP counsel and taking the time to get this right is an investment in your business’s future.

Copyright Issues in Rebranding

Copyright protects original creative works, including things like logos, promotional materials, and even the text on your website. Unlike trademarks, copyright protection is automatic as soon as you create something original. But here’s the catch: you need to make sure what you’re creating is truly original.

Many businesses look at other successful brands for inspiration, but be careful. Copying or closely mimicking someone else’s work can lead to problems. Even if it’s unintentional, copyright infringement can result in costly lawsuits. So when you’re designing new brand elements, make sure your team is creating from scratch, not just tweaking existing designs or messaging.

What if you want to use something that someone else created? Maybe you’ve found the perfect stock photo for your website homepage, or you want to use a particular font for your logo. In these cases, you need to secure the right licenses. Don’t assume that because something is available online, it’s free to use. Always check the licensing terms and, when in doubt, reach out to the copyright owner for permission (and be prepared to pay for the privilege to use someone else’s creation).

For your own new creations, consider registering the copyright. While not required, registration with the U.S. Copyright Office can provide additional benefits if you ever need to enforce your rights. It’s especially worth considering for key elements of your new brand identity.

Securing Your Online Presence

When you rebrand, you need to think beyond business cards and signage—you need to consider your digital footprint too.

Your website is often the first point of contact for potential customers, so you want to make sure your new brand name is reflected in your web domain name. As soon as you’ve settled on a new name, check if the corresponding domain name is available. And don’t just look at .com. Consider other extensions like .net, .org, or country-specific domains if they’re relevant to your business.

Next, think about social media. Your handles on platforms like X, Instagram, and Facebook are an important part of your brand identity. Ideally, you want consistent handles across all platforms. Check the availability of your new brand name on all the social media channels you plan to use. If the exact name isn’t available everywhere, try to choose variations that are as close and consistent as possible.

By registering relevant domain names and social media handles, you’re preventing others from using names that could be confused with your brand. This helps avoid customer confusion and potential trademark issues down the line.

Working with Legal Experts

While you might be tempted to handle all aspects of your rebrand in-house, when it comes to the legal side of things, it’s wise to bring in a professional early in the process. An IP lawyer can guide you through trademark searches, helping you interpret the results and assess the level of risk associated with your new brand elements. They can also assist with the trademark registration process, ensuring all paperwork is filed correctly and on time.

If your rebrand involves complex issues – like transferring existing IP rights or navigating international markets – expert legal advice becomes even more crucial. An experienced IP attorney can help you navigate these complexities and develop a strategy that protects your brand across all your target markets.

Protecting Your New Brand

After you’ve launched your brand, your work isn’t over yet. Now comes the ongoing task of protecting your new brand.

First and foremost, you need to monitor the marketplace. Keep an eye out for any businesses using names, logos, or other branding elements that are similar to yours. The earlier you catch potential infringement, the easier it is to address.

If you do spot a potential infringement, don’t rush to sue. Often, a carefully worded cease and desist letter can resolve the issue. This is where having a relationship with an IP attorney can be valuable—they can help you determine if there’s really an infringement and guide you on the appropriate action to take.

But protection isn’t just about policing others—it’s also about maintaining your own rights. For example, use your trademarks consistently and properly. If you’ve registered a logo, make sure you’re using it in the form in which it was registered. Keep records of how and when you use your trademarks in commerce.

Be proactive and make IP an important strategic consideration for your business.

Conclusion

Rebranding your business is a big step, filled with both exciting opportunities and potential challenges. As we’ve discussed, protecting your intellectual property is a crucial part of this process that shouldn’t be overlooked. With careful planning, the right protections in place, and assistance from an experienced IP lawyer, your new brand can become a powerful tool for growing your business and standing out in the marketplace.

This alert serves as a general summary and does not constitute legal guidance. Please contact us with any specific questions.


Andrew G. Martin is an experienced registered patent attorney with history working in the automotive, electrical, and agricultural industries. He regularly advises startups and small businesses on the patent and trademark prosecution process, assisting clients from start to finish. You can reach him at 517.377.0834 or at amartin@fraserlawfirm.com.

FTC Non-Compete Prohibition on Hold Again

Procedural Background and Result

Readers are of course familiar with the background of this matter. Briefly, the FTC issued a Final Rule, scheduled to go into effect on September 4, 2024, placing limitations on non-compete and related employer contracts or policies. That rule has been reviewed by three courts. Previously, the Northern District of Texas invalidated the rule as beyond the authority of the FTC to issue, but issued an injunction barring enforcement of the rule only with respect to the parties to that litigation. Ryan LLC v. Fed. Trade Comm’n, No. 3:24-CV-00986-E, 2024 WL 3297524 (N.D. Tex. July 3, 2024). A second district court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, upheld the rule.

U.S. District Judge Ada Brown, sitting in the Northern District Court in  Texas, has now held the rule invalid as “arbitrary and capricious.” In comparison to her first ruling, however, this court issued a national injunctive order barring enforcement of the rule in all United States federal court jurisdiction. Ryan LLC v. FTC. LINK. As a result, employers are not required to follow the Final Rule. The duration of this order and status is unknown, but can be expected to be several months or longer, or possibly permanent.

In a significant legal decision, Texas’ Northern District has ruled that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) nationwide ban on non-compete agreements was unenforceable. The ruling issued on August 20, 2024, strikes down the FTC’s attempt to impose a sweeping nation-wide prohibition on these employment contracts, which had been a cornerstone of the agency’s recent regulatory agenda.

Further Background – The FTC Rule

The FTC proposed a blanket ban on non-compete clauses earlier this year, arguing that such agreements unfairly restricted workers’ mobility and suppressed wages. The proposal quickly became one of the most hotly debated regulatory measures in the labor market, with proponents claiming it would empower workers and opponents arguing that it would undermine business competitiveness.

The challenge to the FTC’s rule was brought by a coalition of business groups and industry associations, which argued that the agency overstepped its authority and failed to adequately justify the sweeping nature of the ban. They claimed that the FTC did not fully consider the economic impact of the rule or the potential benefits of non-compete clauses in certain circumstances, such as protecting trade secrets and fostering innovation

Key Findings in the Most Recent Ruling

Judge Brown’s ruling focused on the procedural and substantive aspects of the FTC’s rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). She found that the FTC failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the necessity of a nationwide ban, particularly in light of the economic and industry-specific variations across different sectors.

“The FTC dismissed any possible alternatives, concluding that either the pro-competitive justifications outweighed the harms, or that employers had other avenues to protect their interests.,” Judge Brown wrote in her opinion. She emphasized that while the agency has the authority to regulate unfair competition practices, it must do so within the framework of the law, ensuring that regulations are not imposed in an arbitrary manner.

The judge also criticized the FTC for not adequately addressing the concerns raised during the public comment period, particularly those from businesses that rely on non-compete agreements to protect trade secrets and maintain competitive advantage.

Further Implications of the Ruling

The ruling represents a significant setback for the FTC and its Chair, Lina Khan, who has been an outspoken advocate for more aggressive antitrust and labor market regulations. It also sends a clear message to federal agencies about the importance of adhering to procedural norms and thoroughly justifying the economic rationale behind sweeping regulatory changes.

The Final Rule, which was set to take effect on September 4, 2024, is now blocked from enforcement pending further legal developments.

This decision represents a significant victory for employers, especially in industries where non-compete agreements are common. However, the FTC may appeal this ruling, leaving the final outcome uncertain. Businesses should stay informed as the legal landscape around non-competes continues to evolve.

What’s Next?

As the legal battle over non-compete clauses continues, the debate over the balance between worker freedom and business interests is expected to intensify. Labor advocates may push for legislative solutions at the state or federal level, while businesses and trade groups will likely continue to defend the use of non-competes as essential tools for protecting intellectual property and maintaining a competitive edge.

However, companies should take this opportunity to analyze their use of non-compete agreements. No longer can non-competes be considered just another document signed during the onboarding process. Recent criticism and public focus on these agreements puts a greater emphasis on the need to narrowly tailor non-competes to protect legitimate business interests. Indeed, non-compete agreements are only one piece of an overall protection strategy. An integrated program involving the protection of trade secrets, confidential information and intellectual property not only involves proper agreements and policies, but also employee training and systems to enforce such protections.

For now, Judge Brown’s ruling has put the brakes on the FTC’s ambitious regulatory agenda, but the future of non-compete agreements in the U.S. remains uncertain.

This alert serves as a general summary and does not constitute legal guidance. Please contact us with any specific questions.


Attorney David J. HoustonFraser Trebilcock Shareholder Dave Houston has over 40 years of experience representing employers in planning, counseling, and litigating virtually all employment claims and disputes including labor relations (NLRB and MERC), wage and overtime, and employment discrimination, and negotiation of union contracts. He has authored numerous publications regarding employment issues. You can reach him at 517.377.0855 or dhouston@fraserlawfirm.com.


Andrew G. Martin is an experienced registered patent attorney with history working in the automotive, electrical, and agricultural industries. He regularly advises startups and small businesses on the patent and trademark prosecution process, assisting clients from start to finish. You can reach him at 517.377.0834 or at amartin@fraserlawfirm.com.

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – August 23, 2024

  1. Michigan to Receive $129 Million in Federal Funds for Renewable Energy 

It was recently announced that Michigan will receive $129 million in federal funds to accelerate the siting, zoning and permitting of large-scale renewable energy projects. The funds will come from the federal Inflation Reduction Act’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program.

Why it Matters: Michigan, like many other states, has set aggressive goals to decarbonize its electric grid over the next decade.

———

  1. Strategic Alliance Announced Between Fraser Trebilcock and Cheltenham Law

Fraser Trebilcock Davis Dunlap & Cavanaugh P.C. is excited to announce a strategic alliance with Cheltenham Law, PLLC. As both firms have a strong presence in the Greater Lansing and Detroit regions, this collaboration brings together two prominent law firms seeking to strengthen their opportunities in Michigan.

Why it Matters:  Cheltenham Law offers clients the full spectrum of legal representation and guidance in matters such as divorce, custody, criminal defense, and estate planning. This arrangement allows Fraser Trebilcock to use its knowledge and expertise in the areas of family law, criminal defense, and estate planning, among others, to enhance its presence in the Greater Lansing and Detroit regions. Read more.

———

  1. Fraser Trebilcock Welcomes John R. Fifarek to the Firm

Fraser Trebilcock is pleased to announce the hiring of attorney John R. Fifarek who will work primarily in the firm’s Lansing office.

Why it Matters: Mr. Fifarek is an attorney with over four decades of experience in real estate matters advising property owners, developers, buyers, sellers, commercial landlords and tenants in the development, sale, purchase and leasing of property, environmental, land use and planning matters, and in court and administrative proceedings. Learn more.

———

  1. Michigan CRA Publishes July ’24 Data: Average Price Decreases

Per data released by the Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA), the average retail price for adult-use sale of an ounce of cannabis in July was $79.70, a decrease from $85.88 in June. This is a decrease from July 2023, where the average price was $98.65.

Why it Matters: While the prices of cannabis and cannabis-related products continue to decrease and make consumers happy, growers on the other hand are seeing profits decrease resulting in them seeking ways to halt new licenses to be granted in an effort to steady prices.

———

  1. Comment Period Ends for Federal Cannabis Rescheduling

On May 20, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to initiate the proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II under the Controlled Substance Act. A 60-day public comment period then began, which ended in late July.

Why it Matters: Following the end of the public comment period, the DEA will review the public comments, may incorporate comments as appropriate, and then finalize the rescheduling rule. Typically, a final rule becomes effective 30 days after being published in the Federal Register.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

John Fifarek
Energy, Utilities & Telecommunication | Sean Gallagher
Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – August 16, 2024

  1. Student Can’t Bring an ELCRA Hostile Environment Claim Against School Due to Harassment from Another Student

In Doe v Alpena Public School District, the Michigan Supreme Court recently ruled that a school cannot be held liable on a theory of vicarious liability under the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act for student-on-student misconduct.

Why it Matters: The Court’s ruling draws a distinction between the employment context, where such vicarious liability claims are permitted, and the school context for actions taken by non-employees, such as students.

———

  1. Michigan Supreme Court Rules on Adopt and Amend: What Businesses Need to Know

In Mothering Justice v Attorney General, a 105-page, 4-3 party-line decision, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature lacked the authority to “adopt and amend” two employment-related ballot initiatives in 2018. In its ruling, the Court ordered that increases to the state’s minimum wage and tipped wage laws, and the expansion of the state’s earned sick time laws will go into effect February 21, 2025.

Why it Matters: Employers will need to educate their staff on these changes, adjust payroll systems, and ensure their company’s policies are updated to reflect the new laws before the February 21, 2025, deadline to remain compliant. Learn more.

———

  1. Michigan Cannabis Exceeds $287 Million in July ‘24

Cannabis sales surpassed $278 million in July, via the monthly report from the Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency. Michigan adult-use sales came in at $286,388,987.71, while medical sales came in at $1,354,084.70, totaling $287,743,072.45.

Why it Matters: While the prices of cannabis and cannabis-related products continue to decrease and make consumers happy, growers on the other hand are seeing profits decrease resulting in them seeking ways to halt new licenses to be granted in an effort to steady prices.

———

  1. Comment Period Ends for Federal Cannabis Rescheduling

On May 20, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to initiate the proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II under the Controlled Substance Act. A 60-day public comment period then began, which ended in late July.

Why it Matters: Following the end of the public comment period, the DEA will review the public comments, may incorporate comments as appropriate, and then finalize the rescheduling rule. Typically, a final rule becomes effective 30 days after being published in the Federal Register.

———

  1. IRS Resumes Processing Some Employee Retention Credit Claims: What Business Owners Need to Know

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently announced the resumption of processing some Employee Retention Credit (ERC) claims, with a focus on those considered “low risk.” This move comes after a 10-month moratorium implemented to investigate fraudulent activity surrounding these claims. In the same announcement, the IRS communicated its plans to deny tens of thousands of improper high-risk ERC claims.

Why it Matters: According to the IRS, between 10% and 20% of the claims it analyzed fall into what the agency considers the highest-risk group. An estimated 60% to 70% of claims show what the IRS terms an “unacceptable level of risk.” The remaining claims, approximately 10% to 20%, are considered low-risk, and according to the IRS, “some of the first payments in this group will go out later this summer.” Read more.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Labor, Employment & Civil Rights | David Houston
Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher
Business & Tax | Robert Burgee
Business & Tax | Paul McCord

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – August 9, 2024

  1. Michigan Supreme Court Rules on Adopt and Amend: What Businesses Need to Know

In Mothering Justice v Attorney General, a 105-page, 4-3 party-line decision, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature lacked the authority to “adopt and amend” two employment-related ballot initiatives in 2018. In its ruling, the Court ordered that increases to the state’s minimum wage and tipped wage laws, and the expansion of the state’s earned sick time laws will go into effect February 21, 2025.

Why it Matters: Employers will need to educate their staff on these changes, adjust payroll systems, and ensure their company’s policies are updated to reflect the new laws before the February 21, 2025, deadline to remain compliant. Learn more.

———

  1. IRS Resumes Processing Some Employee Retention Credit Claims: What Business Owners Need to Know

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently announced the resumption of processing some Employee Retention Credit (ERC) claims, with a focus on those considered “low risk.” This move comes after a 10-month moratorium implemented to investigate fraudulent activity surrounding these claims. In the same announcement, the IRS communicated its plans to deny tens of thousands of improper high-risk ERC claims.

Why it Matters: According to the IRS, between 10% and 20% of the claims it analyzed fall into what the agency considers the highest-risk group. An estimated 60% to 70% of claims show what the IRS terms an “unacceptable level of risk.” The remaining claims, approximately 10% to 20%, are considered low-risk, and according to the IRS, “some of the first payments in this group will go out later this summer.” Read more.

———

  1. Comment Period Ends for Federal Cannabis Rescheduling

On May 20, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to initiate the proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II under the Controlled Substance Act. A 60-day public comment period then began, which ended in late July.

Why it Matters: Following the end of the public comment period, the DEA will review the public comments, may incorporate comments as appropriate, and then finalize the rescheduling rule. Typically, a final rule becomes effective 30 days after being published in the Federal Register.

———

  1. Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency Set to Ban MCT Oil

In a recent technical bulletin from the CRA, effective October 1, 2024, “MCT (medium-chain triglyceride) oil will be added as a target analyte for marijuana vape cartridges as part of the Sampling and Testing Technical Guidance for Marijuana Products.

Why it Matters: MCT oil is commonly used in inhalable cannabis products, such as vapes, and may pose dangers to respiratory health when inhaled. Businesses will need to adhere to the new testing parameters and begin to eliminate MCT oil from their products before October 1, 2024, if not sooner in a proactive manner.

———

  1. DOL Issues Bulletin to Wage and Hour Field Staff Regarding AI Use in Workplace

The United States Department of Labor recently issued a Field Assistance Bulletin to its Wage and Hour Division field staff regarding the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and other federal labor standards as employers increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) and other automated systems in the workplace. For example, the bulletin advises that, “Reliance on automated timekeeping and monitoring systems without proper human oversight, however, can create potential compliance challenges with respect to determining hours worked for purposes of federal wage and hour laws.”

Why it Matters: As AI use becomes more pervasive across businesses, employers must be aware that their use of AI can create legal compliance challenges, and that regulatory agencies are paying attention to these issues.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Labor, Employment & Civil Rights | David Houston
Business & Tax | Robert Burgee
Business & Tax | Paul McCord
Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher

IRS Resumes Processing Some Employee Retention Credit Claims: What Business Owners Need to Know

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently announced the resumption of processing some Employee Retention Credit (ERC) claims, with a focus on those considered “low risk.” This move comes after a 10-month moratorium implemented to investigate fraudulent activity surrounding these claims. In the same announcement, the IRS communicated its plans to deny tens of thousands of improper high-risk ERC claims.

During the processing freeze, the IRS conducted an extensive review of ERC claims. The results of this investigation have raised significant concerns and shed light on the scale of potentially fraudulent or erroneous claims. According to the IRS, between 10% and 20% of the claims it analyzed fall into what the agency considers the highest-risk group. An estimated 60% to 70% of claims show what the IRS terms an “unacceptable level of risk.” While not as clearly problematic as the high-risk group, these claims have raised red flags that the agency believes warrant further scrutiny. The remaining claims, approximately 10% to 20%, are considered low-risk, and according to the IRS, “some of the first payments in this group will go out later this summer.”

What This Means for Business Owners

If you’ve filed an ERC claim or are considering doing so, here’s what you need to know:

  1. Claims Filed Before September 14, 2023: If you submitted your ERC claim before the moratorium started on September 14, 2023, the IRS states that no additional information or action is required from you at this time. These claims will continue to be processed on a first-in, first-out basis, and taxpayers should await further notification from the IRS.
  2. Claims Filed On or After September 14, 2023: If you submitted your claim on or after this date, your claim is expected to remain in the processing queue at the IRS indefinitely. The IRS has not provided a timeline for when these claims might be addressed.
  3. Preparing for Potential Audits: Given the high level of scrutiny the IRS is applying to these claims, business owners should be prepared for the possibility of audits or requests for additional information, even if their claims are eventually approved.

If you’re concerned about the status of your claim, have been contacted by the IRS about your claim, or have other questions about the claims process, please contact your Fraser Trebilcock attorney.

This alert serves as a general summary and does not constitute legal guidance. Please contact us with any specific questions.


Robert D. Burgee is an attorney at Fraser Trebilcock with over a decade of experience counseling clients with a focus on corporate structures and compliance, licensing, contracts, regulatory compliance, mergers and acquisitions, and a host of other matters related to the operation of small and medium-sized businesses and non-profits. You can reach him at 517.377.0848 or at bburgee@fraserlawfirm.com.


Headshot of Fraser Trebilcock attorney Paul V. McCordFraser Trebilcock attorney Paul V. McCord has more than 20 years of tax litigation experience, including serving as a clerk on the U.S. Tax Court and as a judge of the Michigan Tax Tribunal. Paul has represented clients before the IRS, Michigan Department of Treasury, other state revenue departments and local units of government. He can be contacted at 517.377.0861 or pmccord@fraserlawfirm.com.

Michigan Supreme Court Rules on Adopt and Amend: What Businesses Need to Know

Background:  Adopt and Amend Unauthorized 

In Mothering Justice v Attorney General, a 105-page, 4-3 party-line decision, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature lacked the authority to “adopt and amend” two employment-related ballot initiatives in 2018. In support of the legislature’s authority, the minority noted that there is nothing in the Michigan constitution limiting that authority. The majority found the legislature’s action to have been a usurpation of the right of the voters to initiate and effectively implement new legislation. The ruling reinstates two ballot initiative measures affecting Michigan workers. Much more will be written about this aspect of the decision, however, the bottom-line for Michigan employers is: Employees are going to be more costly and more difficult to manage within the law.

What This Means for Businesses

The case involved the “Wage Act” proposing changes to minimum wage and overtime laws, and the “Earned Sick Time Act.” In its ruling, the Court ordered that increases to the state’s minimum wage and tipped wage laws, and the expansion of the state’s earned sick time laws will go into effect February 21, 2025. The “standard” minimum wage for non-tipped employees will increase to an adjusted rate, calculated by the state treasurer, of more than $12 per hour. Tipped workers, the percentage that businesses pay will increase to 48%. By this formula, the minimum wage will increase each year until 2029, when the tipped and non-tipped minimum wages will be the same.

Earned sick time leave will also see an overhaul for both large and small employers. Employers with more than 10 employees must provide 72 hours of paid sick time leave, and employers with less than 10 employees must provide 40 hours of paid sick time leave annually and 32 hours of unpaid leave. Employees, including part-time and seasonal, will receive one hour of paid medical leave for every 30 hours worked, up to 72 hours per year. This is an increase from the previous maximum of 40 hours per year. Additionally, employers with less than 50 employees are no longer exempt from having to offer earned sick time leave.

Employers will need to educate their staff on these changes, adjust payroll systems, and ensure their company’s policies are updated to reflect the new laws before the February 21, 2025, deadline to remain compliant.

If you’re concerned about these changes or have questions, please contact David J. Houston or your Fraser Trebilcock attorney.

This alert serves as a general summary and does not constitute legal guidance. Please contact us with any specific questions. You can read the full Opinion here.


Attorney David J. HoustonFraser Trebilcock Shareholder Dave Houston has over 40 years of experience representing employers in planning, counseling, and litigating virtually all employment claims and disputes including labor relations (NLRB and MERC), wage and overtime, and employment discrimination, and negotiation of union contracts. He has authored numerous publications regarding employment issues. You can reach him at 517.377.0855 or dhouston@fraserlawfirm.com.

Five Stories That Matter in Michigan This Week – August 2, 2024

  1. DOL Issues Bulletin to Wage and Hour Field Staff Regarding AI Use in Workplace

The United States Department of Labor recently issued a Field Assistance Bulletin to its Wage and Hour Division field staff regarding the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and other federal labor standards as employers increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) and other automated systems in the workplace. For example, the bulletin advises that, “Reliance on automated timekeeping and monitoring systems without proper human oversight, however, can create potential compliance challenges with respect to determining hours worked for purposes of federal wage and hour laws.”

Why it Matters: As AI use becomes more pervasive across businesses, employers must be aware that their use of AI can create legal compliance challenges, and that regulatory agencies are paying attention to these issues.

———

  1. Michigan Supreme Court Rules Against “Adopt and Amend”

In Mothering Justice v Attorney General, a 105-page. 4-3 party-line decision, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature lacked the authority to “adopt and amend” two employment-related ballot initiatives in 2018.

Why it Matters: In its ruling, the Court ordered that increases to the state’s minimum wage and tipped wage laws, and the expansion of the state’s earned sick time laws will go into effect February 21, 2025.

———

  1. Michigan CRA Files Formal Complaint Against Adult-Use Marijuana Processor

The Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency recently filed a formal complaint against Sky Labs LLC, an adult-use marijuana processor, alleging that the business received THCA isolate from an out-of-state business to convert to marijuana distillate and disguised the purchase in the METRC monitoring system as Sky Labs LLC does not have the proper license to convert THCA isolate to marijuana distillate.

Why it Matters: The CRA intends to impose fines and/or other sanctions against Sky Labs, LLC, which include suspension, restriction, or revocation, of the business’s license.

———

  1. Federal Judge Upholds FTC Ban on Non-Compete Agreements

A federal judge recently denied a tree-trimming company’s bid to block the FTC’s ban on non-compete agreements, following the agency issuing the final rule in April, which is set to take effect on September 4, 2024.

Why it Matters: Under the final rule, “Non-compete clause” is defined as “a term or condition of employment that prohibits a worker from, penalizes a worker for, or functions to prevent a worker from: (i) seeking or accepting work in the United States with a different person where such work would begin after the conclusion of the employment that includes the term or condition; or (ii) operating a business in the United States after the conclusion of the employment that includes the term or condition.” The final rule covers all entities subject to the FTC Act (generally, most for-profit entities, but not non-profit organizations). Read more from your Fraser Trebilcock attorneys.

———

  1. Michigan Supreme Court Rules that Condo Association Owes Duty of Care to Co-Owners for Premises Liability

In a ruling on July 11, 2024, the Michigan Supreme Court overturned previous case law and redefined the legal relationship between condominium associations and their co-owners with respect to premises liability.

Why it Matters: The Court ruled that when using common areas of the condominium, a co-owner is deemed to be an invitee. This classification requires the condominium association to exercise reasonable care to protect co-owners from hazardous conditions in these shared spaces. Learn more.

Related Practice Groups and Professionals

Labor, Employment & Civil Rights | David Houston
Cannabis Law | Sean Gallagher
Real Estate | Andrew Moore