H. Joel Newman

Attorney in Birmingham, MI
Mr. Newman successfully defended a "Big Three" automobile and truck manufacturer in an action brought by two major motor home manufacturers seeking eight figure damages for allegedly defective product. He has represented clients in shareholder disputes involving more than $1,000.000,000 in disputed assets. H. Joel Newman has obtained large jury verdicts against major corporations and has succeeded in obtaining no cause of action verdicts in cases with substantial potential liability. AV Peer Review Rated. Ranked as TOP Lawyer by DBusiness, Detroit's premier business journal.

Reported Cases

BREACH OF CONTRACT

CASE: - Business Litigation

A Local real estate developer retained us to file an action in the United States District Court against a major life insurance company and its subsidiary for breach of a joint venture agreement to acquire an internationally acclaimed high-rise building in Miami, Florida. After a jury trial lasting three weeks, at the close of testimony Defendants agreed to pay our clients $5,000,000 cash.

CASE: - Business Litigation

A well-established tier-one automobile supplier entered into a contract with two partners of a big six international accounting firm to pursue acquisition opportunities. When the supplier discovered that the joint venture partners were pursuing separate opportunities for themselves, the supplier terminated the accountants' services. The accountants filed a breach of contract action against the supplier seeking $3,500,000 in damages. We filed an answer denying liability and a counter-claim for the accountant's breach of contract. After the jury trial, we obtained a no cause for action on the accountants' claim and a verdict of $2,000,000 on our counter-claim.

CASE: - Business Litigation

A very successful Bloomfield Hills dentist brought in a young man to eventually buy his practice. The young dentist's mother, a former large firm trial lawyer, drew up documents which in the fine print, gave her son 100% ownership before any payment was due. When our client asked the young dentist to leave he was told it was him that should leave. Our client's original counsel was overwhelmed when the attorney/mother filed ten separate administrative and civil actions against our client. We tried two of the matters successfully. The others were dismissed.

SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES

CASE: - Business Litigation

The President and 50 percent shareholder of a multi-million dollar national enterprise retained us to defend a shareholder oppression action brought by his siblings seeking over $200 million in damages and other relief for alleged usurpation of corporate opportunities, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. After several years of pre-trial maneuvering and interlocutory appeals to the Michigan Court of Appeals and Michigan Supreme Court, the case went to trial. Shortly before trial plaintiffs hired a nationally known trial firm with billions of dollars of verdicts in its portfolio. After a jury trial lasting 11 weeks, the case was settled. While the results are confidential, our client believed we achieved a very favorable result.

CASE: - Business Litigation

Our client, a minority shareholder, had been frozen out of his corporation by his partners and fellow shareholders. We took over this case from another law firm after 1 1/2 years of litigation when the case was on the verge of dismissal. After discovering an important document and pursuing a new theory overlooked by predecessor counsel, we persuaded the court not to dismiss the case. Shortly thereafter, defendants came to the table and the matter was settled for $600,000. In addition, we brought a successful malpractice claim against predecessor counsel.

CASE: - Business Litigation

Our client, a fifty (50%) percent shareholder in a closely held family owned business brought a claim for oppression and dissolution based on deadlock. Discovery was quite extensive and numerous substantive and dispositive motions were argued. Ultimately, the case went to special mediation and the confidential settlement was resolved very satisfactorily to our client.

EMPLOYMENT LAW - Business Litigation

CASE: - Business Litigation

One of the oldest and most distinguished nationally known Michigan law firms retained us to defend a sensitive sexual harassment suit brought by an employee claiming that a senior partner in the firm repeatedly made inappropriate sexual advances towards her. After discovery and mediation we were successful in settling the case before trial for a nuisance value.

CASE: - Business Litigation

A plant manager and former vice-president of one of the "big three" automobile manufacturers was terminated after a management shake-up. We started suit and after completion of discovery successfully negotiated a $1,000,000 settlement in his behalf.

CASE: - Business Litigation

We successfully defended a large regional apartment operator in a race discrimination action, obtaining a full dismissal.

CASE: - Business Litigation

We obtained lifetime hospitalization insurance for more than 200 widows of retired City of Detroit policemen and fire-fighters in an action against the City.

REAL ESTATE - LAND USE

CASE: - Business Litigation

Representing real estate developers who owned more than 4,000 apartment units, we were successful in obtaining a declaratory judgment striking down a refuge collection ordinance as unconstitutional. The ordinance required local businesses to use the Township's collection and incineration service. Our work resulted in closing an incinerator serving five municipalities and savings of millions of dollars to our clients.

CASE: - Business Litigation

After a lengthy trial, the court awarded mobile home parking zoning to our client and required the city to pay damages along with attorneys' and expert witness fees.

MALPRACTICE

CASE: - Business Litigation

Our client retained us to file a legal malpractice action against its former law firm. As a result of our client's former law firm's errors, the client was forced to settle what should have been an $800,000 matter for an amount exceeding $2 million. After engaging in significant discovery and after we completed several key depositions, defendant law firm's insurance carrier recommending facilitation-well before the case evaluation and summary disposition stage. We vigorously and thoroughly presented a compelling case and obtained a highly successful settlement through facilitation. Our client was extremely pleased with the result.

GENERAL TORT LITIGATION

CASE: - Business Litigation

We were retained by an incarcerated client serving 8 to 15 years for allegedly having inappropriate, yet consensual, sexual relations with a minor. The minor, through her mother, pursued an assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against our client. We developed a defense by evidence that the minor's mental and physical development was not impaired in any way. During discovery, we obtained the minor's school and social records which revealed that the minor excelled in school, enjoyed a large network of friends, and was not particularly troubled by the relationship with our client. The minor's attorney attempted to block and frustrate our discovery efforts, which we vigorously pursued before the trial judge. Shortly thereafter, we obtained a complete order of dismissal with prejudice.

INSURANCE LITIGATION

CASE: - Business Litigation

Our general contractor client hired a subcontractor to install huge windows on a large commercial building. The subcontractor obtained an insurance policy on its workmanship, naming our client as the beneficiary. After our client discovered that the subcontractor had installed the windows defectively, it incurred approximately $1,000,000 in replacement costs and the subcontractor filed for bankruptcy. We pursued claims against both the subcontractor's insurance agent and the actual insurance company for reimbursement. After completing several key depositions, and after we successfully defeated all summary disposition motions, we obtained an extremely high settlement from both the insurance agent and the insurance company, including compensation for our client's attorney fees.

CASE: - Business Litigation

We obtained a $1.5 million jury verdict on behalf of our large janitorial services client after we proved that the defendants, insurance agents, had fraudulently sold our client non-existent health insurance policies for it's employees. The jury verdict included exemplary damages, actual damages and compensation for our client's attorney fees.

CASE: - Business Litigation

A client came to us after a judgment exceeding $5 million had been entered against it-all stemming from an approximately $800,000.00 employment matter with one of its former employees. Represented by another law firm, the client spent over four years in litigation, sat through a week long jury trial, and came to us economically exhausted. We obtained peremptory reversal from the Michigan Court of Appeals, which reduced the judgment by more than $2 million, to $3.6 million. We mounted a vigorous appeal and obtained a highly successful settlement in an amount far below the amended judgment. As a result of our efforts, our client is now economically healthy and prosperous.

Phi Beta Kappa.
248-430-8769
Free Consultation | Credit Cards Accepted
  • Business Litigation
  • Minority Shareholder Oppression
  • LLC Member Oppression
  • Torts
  • Shareholder Litigation
  • Shareholder Disputes
  • Partnership Litigation
  • Employment Litigation
  • Zoning Law
  • Complex Commercial Litigation
  • Constitutional Litigation
  • Business Law
  • Litigation
  • Attorney Malpractice
  • Commercial Law
  • Construction Law
  • Contracts
  • Eminent Domain
  • Labor and Employment
  • Legal Malpractice
  • Zoning
  • Appeals
  • Breach of Contracts
  • Business Disputes
  • General Tort Litigation
  • LLC Litigation
  • Will Contest
  • Fraud and Deceit

 

Overall Client Rating

4.8 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
5.0
Responsiveness
5.0
Quality of Service
5.0
Value for Money
4.0

  • Data based on 1 reviews
  • Last reviewed on 03/30/12
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.
Are you a former client?  Submit a review

Legal Community Activity

Experience & Credentials

Position

Managing Member/Trial Attorney

Admission Details

Admitted in 1985, Michigan
1986, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan
1987, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
1989, U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan

Credit Cards Accepted
American Express
Mastercard
Visa


Also accepts Other
Additional Payment Information
  • Free Initial Consultation
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Fixed Fees Available
  • Law School Attended

    University of Michigan Law School
    Class of 1985
    J.D.

    University Attended

    Wayne State University
    Class of 1981
    B.A.
    Highest Distinction, Phi Beta Kappa

    Languages

    Spanish

    Associations & Memberships

    Oakland County Bar Association ; Oakland County Bar Foundation; State Bar of Michigan (Member, Sections on: Master Lawyers, Business Law and Real Property) ; American Trial Lawyers Association; ... More

    Bar Fellowship

    Oakland County Bar Foundation (Life Charter Fellow).

    Representative Cases

    Unibar Maintenance Services, Inc v. Joseph Saigh and Lawrence Wells283 Mich App 609 769 N.W. 2d 911 (Court of App. Mich. 2009)Paragon Properties Co. v. City of Novi, 452 Mich. 568, 500 N.W.2d 772 (Supreme Court of Mich. 1996); Baks v. Moroun, 227 Mich. App. 472, 576 N.W.2d 413 (Court of App. Mich. 1998); Nolan Bros. of Texas, Inc. v. City of Royal ... More

    Community Contributions

    Contact Information

    Phone

    248-723-1238 Call Now

    Fax

    248-850-1533

    Email

    Send email to H. Joel Newman

    Social Networking



    Office Information
    H. Joel Newman
    Managing Member/Trial Attorney
     370 E. Maple Road, Third Floor,
    Birmingham, MI 48009

    Loading...

    Logo
    H. Joel Newman, PLLC (Birmingham, Michigan)

    About Client Rating
    About Peer Rating

    Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

    Determining a Rating

    The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

    • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
    • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
    • 1-2.9 Rated

    Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

    The Reviewers

    Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.

    Anonymity

    Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

    Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

    Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

    Martindale-Hubbell's role

    Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

    It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.