“As a litigator, I treat my client's legal issues as if they are my own.”
Mr. Long concentrates his practice in the areas of complex commercial litigation, products liability, and real estate. He has twenty-four years of experience litigating complex commercial litigation and business litigation cases, including disputes involving manufacturers, suppliers, vendors, and independent contractors. Mr. Long has also defended business litigation cases involving automotive supply controversies, joint venture agreements, construction disputes, vendor terminations, shareholder disputes and business divorces, non-competition covenants, misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference, and other business torts. In addition to his broad commercial litigation and business litigation experience, Mr. Long has extensive experience in defending medical device products liability cases across the country. He has defended medical device manufacturers in courts in California, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Mr. Long has also defended manufacturers in a variety of medical device related cases, including devices implanted in the spine, knee, hip, ear, and eye. In addition, he has experience in handling other types of products liability cases, including tire defects, asbestos, silica dust, phentermine and fenfluramine (Phen Fen), phenolic foam, and breast implants.
Mr. Long has been instrumental in the development of defense strategies in complex litigation matters handled by the Firm. He works with clients to find the most cost-effective resolution to disputes and then aggressively pursues litigation where necessary, while keeping open the potential for an amicable resolution. He has tried many cases to verdict in both state and federal courts, as well as before the American Arbitration Association.
In addition to his litigation practice, Mr. Long serves as Howard & Howard Firm General Counsel, handling all of the legal affairs for the Firm and its six offices located in four states.
- Michigan State University College of Law, 1994
- Albion College, 1989
- B.A., Economics, Management
- American Bar Association
- Tort and Insurance; Products Liability; Litigation; Environmental Sections
- State Bar of Michigan
- Insurance, Environmental, and Negligence Sections
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America
- Association of Defense Trial Counsel
- Federal Bar Association
- Eastern District of Michigan
- State Bar of Ohio
- Michigan, 1995
- Ohio, 2006
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, 1995
- U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 1995
- dbusiness, "Top Lawyers," 2016-2018
- Represented a manufacturer of spinal and cervical fusion components in numerous products liability cases brought in various courts nationwide. The first case, which involved extensive discovery and investigation into the cause of the device failures and securing the necessary defense experts, settled just before trial. After demonstrating that the plaintiff's own pre-surgery health issues, instead of failed medical components, significantly contributed to the patient's failure to achieve fusion, we settled that case for 5% of the plaintiff's original demand. The other cases subsequently settled for less than 3% of each plaintiff's initial demand. Edit
Represented a glaucoma valve manufacturer in a suit brought on behalf of an eight-year-old plaintiff due to an allegedly defective valve. Plaintiff sought $1.5MM in damages. After extensive discovery and refuting the claims and numerous proposed experts through depositions, we were able to resolve the case before the summary judgment phase for nuisance value.Edit
Represented a Tier II automotive supplier against a Tier I supplier who had awarded our client a contract to supply a certain vehicle component for the life of the vehicle platform. After our client had invested millions of dollars into the project in reliance upon the contract award, the Tier I supplier subsequently withdrew the contract award when they determined that they could redesign and manufacture the component themselves at a significant cost savings. After a three-week trial, our client was awarded in excess of $3.8MM due to the Tier I suppliers actions.Edit