0

Roadside Drug Testing

Roadside Drug TestingRoadside Drug Testing:

In 2016, Governor Snyder signed the Barbara J. and Thomas J. Swift Law.  This new law stems from a fatal car accident that occurred on Mar 20, 2013 in Escanaba.  A man, driving a logging truck, ran a red light and crashed into Thomas and Barbara Swift’s car.  Thomas was killed instantly and Barbara died three days later.  The man tested positive for THC, an ingredient in marijuana.  He is now serving 5 – 15 years for reckless driving and driving under the influence of drugs causing a death.

This new law will allow/”require” preliminary roadside drug testing.  It will initiate a yearlong pilot program in five counties across Michigan, which is believed to start sometime this year.  Under this new law, certified drug recognition experts, who have probable cause to believe that the driver is under the influence of drugs, are allowed to take a mouth swab.  If you refuse the mouth swab, you could be charged with a civil infraction or, if you are a commercial driver, a misdemeanor.  The mouth swab would then be inserted into a machine that can detect if cannabis, cocaine, methamphetamines, and opiates are present in the sample of saliva.  This saliva sample could potentially show the presence of drugs hours before it would be detected in urine samples.  This new system would be somewhat similar to police officers conducting a breathalyzer test on someone they have reasonable cause to believe is intoxicated.

Driving while under the influence of drugs is a growing epidemic.  The Michigan State Police publishes statistics involving crashes related to drugs.  In 2006 there were 1,581 crashes involving drugs, and in 2015 the amount of crashes rose to 2,215.  This shows that there has been a 40% increase in the amount of car crashes due to drugs.  In Michigan, drivers under the influence of drugs now cause almost as many traffic deaths per year as drunk drivers.  According to the Michigan State Police statistics, in 2016, drugged drivers caused 127 crashes that killed 141 people and drunk drivers caused 165 crashes and killed 176 people.  Over the past decade, the amount of fatal drunk driving crashes has decreased by 36%, while those caused by drugged drivers has increased 263%.  Although, the amount of fatal drugged driving crashes has not surpassed the amount of drunken driving crashes, it is believed to be too attributed to the lack of drug testing.  Drivers are not normally tested for drugs on the scene of an accident/traffic stops.  This new law is going to make drug testing more readily available.

A 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that 10 million people admitted to driving under the influence of illicit drugs during the prior year.  The survey also showed that men were more likely than women to drive under the influence of drugs, and that people between the ages of 18 -25 were more likely to drive after taking drugs.  A study by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute looked at the times of traffic crashes from 2011-2015.  They found that crashes caused by drunk drivers were more concentrated, usually at night and on weekends, and drivers impaired by drugs had no pattern and were spread evenly throughout the week.

In Michigan, it is illegal to drive while intoxicated, or impaired, by alcohol, illegal drugs, and some prescription medications.  Michigan is a zero-tolerance state.  This means that anyone can be prosecuted for any amount of cocaine or Schedule 1 drugs in their system.  Someone who has taken legally prescribed drugs may also be prosecuted if an officer believes that they were impaired while driving due to their medication.  It is unknown how this new program will affect medical marijuana users, as marijuana can be detected hours or days later.

Don’t take a risk on your rights—call one of our Troy Michigan Criminal Defense Attorneys at (248) 398-7100  for a free consultation or contact us with a private message, we can help you get answer, figure out a plan of attack, and execute. Get the results you need.

Operating While Visibly Impaired:

(OWVI) means that because of alcohol or other drugs, your ability to operate a motor vehicle was visibly impaired.

Operating While Intoxicated:

(OWI) includes 3 types of violations:

  • Alcohol or drugs in your body substantially affected your ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.
  • A bodily alcohol content (BAC) at or above 0.08. This level can be determined through a chemical test.
  • High BAC means the alcohol level in your body was at or above 0.17. This level can be determined through a chemical test.
Operating With Any Presence of a Schedule 1 Drug or Cocaine:

(OWPD) means having even a small trace of these drugs in your body, even if you do not appear to be intoxicated or impaired. This can be determined through a chemical test.

Under Age 21 Operating With Any Bodily Alcohol Content:

(Zero Tolerance) means having a BAC of 0.02 to 0.07, or any presence of alcohol in your body other than alcohol that is consumed at a generally recognized religious ceremony.

Don’t take a risk on your rights—call one of our Troy Michigan Criminal Defense Attorneys at (248) 398-7100  for a free consultation or contact us with a private message, we can help you get answer, figure out a plan of attack, and execute. Get the results you need.

0

Michigan Speed Limit Increases

Michigan Speed Limit IncreasesMichigan Speed Limit Increases:
Increased Speed Limit Legislation

Michigan lawmakers have enacted legislation that allows for motorists to increase their speed on many of the state’s roadways. Public Act 445, passed in late 2016, charged the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and Michigan State Police (MSP) with increasing speed limits on certain state roadways based on 85th percentile speeds (the speed at or below which 85% of traffic is moving) and results of various traffic and safety studies. The act has amended Section 257.627 of the Michigan Vehicle Code and required the modified speed limits to be put in place prior to January 5, 2018.

Roadways Identified for Increased Speed Limits

Nearly 1,500 miles of Michigan’s roadways will see a speed limit increase starting May 1, 2017: 900 miles will see an increase to 65 miles per hour and 600 miles will see an increase to 75 miles per hour. As a result, new advisory speed and curve warning signs, shorten passing zones, and change pavement markings will be installed.

According to MDOT and MSP, the following freeways and limited-access freeways are expected to increase from 70 to 75 miles per hour speed limits in accordance with the new state law:

  • I-75 – Bay City to US-23 in Mackinaw City (Bay, Arenac, Ogemaw, Roscommon, Crawford, Otsego, Cheboygan, and Emmet counties), and St. Ignace to Sault Ste. Marie (Mackinac and Chippewa counties)
  • US-127 – I-69 to the end of the freeway at St. Johns (Clinton County), and the beginning of the freeway at Ithaca to I-75 (Gratiot, Isabella, Clare, Roscommon, and Crawford counties)
  • US-131 – M-57 to the end of the freeway north of Manton (Kent, Montcalm, Mecosta, Osceola, and Wexford counties)
  • I-69 – I-69 Business Route (Saginaw Highway) to Swartz Creek (Clinton, Shiawassee, and Genesee counties)
  • I-69 – From the Genesee/Lapeer county line to I-94 (Genesee, Lapeer, and St. Clair counties)
  • US-10 – M-115 to I-75 (Clare, Isabella, Midland, and Bay counties)
  • US-31 – South Oceana County line to US-10 (Oceana and Mason counties)

According to MDOT and MSP, the following non-freeways are expected to increase to 65 miles per hour speed limits in accordance with the new state law:

  • US-2 – Wakefield to Iron River (Gogebic and Iron counties)
  • US-2 – St. Ignace to Rapid River (Mackinac, Schoolcraft, and Delta counties)
  • US-23 – East of Cheboygan to east of M-65 (Cheboygan and Presque Isle counties)
  • US-45 – North of US-2 to M-26 (Gogebic and Ontonagon counties)
  • M-28 – East of Harvey to Christmas (Marquette and Alger counties)
  • M-28 – Munising to I-75 (Alger, Schoolcraft, Luce, and Chippewa counties)
  • M-28 – Wakefield to US-41 (Gogebic, Ontonagon, Houghton, and Baraga counties)
  • M-32 – Atlanta to Alpena (Montmorency and Alpena counties)
  • M-33 – Atlanta to Onaway (Montmorency and Presque Isle counties)
  • M-37 – Mesick to Wolf Lake (Wexford and Lake counties)
  • M-55 – US-31 to Cadillac West (Manistee and Wexford counties)
  • M-64 – M-28 to Old M-107 (Ontonagon County)
  • M-65 – US-23 to M-32 west junction (Arenac, Iosco, Alcona, and Alpena counties)
  • M-65 – M-32 east junction to US-23 (Alpena and Presque Isle counties)
  • M-68 – I-75 to US-23 (Cheboygan and Presque Isle counties)
  • M-72 – Grayling to Mio (Crawford and Oscoda counties)
  • M-72 – Fairview to M-65 north junction (Oscoda and Alcona counties)
  • M-72 – M-65 south junction to Harrisville (Alcona County)
  • M-77 – US-2 to M-28 (Schoolcraft County)
  • M-115 – Benzonia to Mesick (Benzie and Wexford counties)
  • M-123 – I-75 to Paradise (Mackinac and Chippewa counties)
  • M-231 – M-45 to M-104 (Ottawa County)
Michigan Speed Limit Increases: Increased Speed Limits for Commercial Trucks and School Buses

Increased speed limits for trucks and buses was another change prompted by Public Act 445.

The speed limit for trucks on freeways where the speed limit for other vehicles is 70 miles per hour will be increased from 55 miles per hour to 60 miles per hour. Highways with speed limits between 55 miles per hour and 65 miles per hour will remain at 55 miles per hour for trucks (MCL 257.627(6)). The speed limit for school buses will be increased from 50 miles per hour to 55 miles per hour on highways with a speed limit between 55 miles per hour and 65 miles per hour and 60 miles per hour on freeways with a speed limit of 70 miles per hour (MCL 257.627(6) and (7)).

Why Increased Speed Limits?

According to State Transportation Director Kirk T. Steudle, “the corridors identified by MDOT and MSP were selected not only because studies indicated most drivers were already driving at those increased speeds, but also because their design and safety features were best suited to these speed limits. We reviewed design speeds, crash patterns, number of access points, traffic volumes and continuity of these corridors, and chose them to minimize necessary improvements for higher speed limits.”

MDOT and MSP are currently finalizing traffic control orders to implement increased speed limits on remaining roadways. New speed limits will be posted on all of the selected freeway and non-freeway corridors prior to November. With these changes, Michigan will have the highest speed limits of any Great Lakes state.

0

Sued by Portfolio Recovery Associates in Michigan?

Portfolio Recovery AssociatesPortfolio Recovery Associates Lawsuits:

Have you been sued by Portfolio Recovery Associates in Michigan ?  Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC is a buyer of charged off debt. Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC may be showing up on your credit report or they may have served you with a lawsuit, they files thousands of collection lawsuits each year against consumers.

Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC will typically hire a local collection attorney to file a lawsuit against you but we can help defend you. We have handled many cases in cities such as Troy, Sterling Heights, Royal Oak and Shelby Township. 

If you have been contacted by Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC or have outstanding debt, contact Garmo & Kiste, PLC at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

For more subject specific information, please click on the following Article links:

Detroit | Troy | Royal Oak | Warren | Sterling Heights | West Bloomfield | Novi | Rochester Hills | Farmington Hills | Southfield | Oak Park | Birmingham | Clinton Township | Livonia | Allen Park | Redford | Wayne | Dearborn | Berkley | Shelby | Romeo | Lapeer | Clawson | Madison Heights | Hazel Park | Bingham Farms | Harper Woods | Grosse Pointe | St. Clair Shores | Livonia | Plymouth | Northville | Canton | Pleasant Ridge | Clarkston | Waterford | Grosse Pointe Farms | Center Line | Eastpointe | Roseville | Fraser | Grosse Pointe Woods | Harrison Township, Mount Clemens | Armada | Armada Township | Bruce Township | Memphis | Ray Township | Richmond | Richmond Township | Romeo | Washington Township | New Baltimore | Macomb Township | Shelby Township | Westland | Inkster | Utica | Chesterfield Township | Lenox Township | New Haven | Taylor | Southgate | Hamtramck | Romulus | Woodhaven | Wyandotte | Ecorse | Lincoln Park | Wayne County | Lapeer County | Macomb County | Oakland County | Tri-County Metro Detroit area

 

0

Midland Funding Michigan Attorney

 

Midland Funding Michigan AttorneyU.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of debt collectors.

On May 15, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States issued their decision in Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson.

Background:

Respondent Johnson filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2014.  Petitioner Midland Funding filed a “proof of claim” asserting that Johnson owed Midland Funding $1,879.71 in credit card debt from May 2003.  Johnson objected the claim because it violated the relevant statute of limitations under Alabama law.  The bankruptcy court disallowed the claim.

Then, Johnson sued Midland Funding.  She claimed that by filing the obviously time-barred “proof of claim” in her bankruptcy case, Midland Funding claim was “false,” “deceptive,” “misleading,” “unconscionable,” and “unfair” within the meaning of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U. S. C. §§1692e, 1692f.

Decision:

The District Court held that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act did not apply and dismissed the case. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the District Courts decision.  The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari.  After review, the Supreme Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit decision.  The Supreme court, in a 5-3 decision, held that (in a Chapter 13 proceeding) “the filing of a proof of claim that is obviously time barred is not a false, deceptive, misleading, unfair, or unconscionable debt collection practice within the meaning of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.”

Alabama law provides that a creditor has the right to payment of a debt even after the limitations period has expired.  The Supreme Court states that “a ‘claim’ is a ‘right to payment’” and the “passage of time extinguishes remedy but the right remains.”

What that means for you:

The Supreme Court decision in Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson allows debt creditors to file their “proof of claims” in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding irrelevant of a States statute of limitations.  Even if a debt collector files a “proof of claim” in your Chapter 13 bankruptcy case, it doesn’t mean that their claim is enforceable.  Debt collectors have secured the right to file their claims, but this decision doesn’t secure their right to collect on those claims.

Midland Funding Michigan Attorney:

If you have outstanding debt, have been harassed by a debt collection agency, or contacted by a law firm or third party debt buyer like Midland Funding, LLC, Call Garmo & Kiste, PLC at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

More subject specific information, please click on the following Article links:

0

New Michigan Gun Law

Michigan could soon have new gun laws:

The residents of Michigan could soon be able to carry a concealed pistol without a permit or completing any gun safety training.

On May 30, 2017, the Michigan House Panel approved, in a 6-4 vote, a package that would basically get rid of the concealed weapons law.  The bill still needs to be approved by the full House, the Senate, and Governor Rick Snyder before it can become law.

If this bill becomes the law, it would do away with criminal penalties for people who carry concealed weapons without a permit.  Currently, to carry a concealed weapon in Michigan, one must pay $100 for a permit application and fingerprint fee, $115 to renew the permit every four years, and a couple hundred for a gun training class.

Those in support of the bill argue that the concealed weapons permit is essentially a “coat tax” because that gun owner wishes to wear their coat over their gun instead of wearing it openly on their hip.  Supporters also argue that no permit or gun training is required for those who openly carry a firearm, so there should not be such a requirement for those who choose to conceal their firearm.

Those who oppose the bill believe that Michigan would be less safe.  Opponents are especially concerned because the bill would allow people with certain misdemeanor convictions to carry concealed weapons who are not currently able to receive a permit to do so.

For more information or to retain Garmo & Kiste, PLC call us at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

0

Michigan’s New MIP Law

Michigan's New MIP LawMichigan’s New MIP Law to take effect in 2018:

Governor Snyder signed Michigan’s New MIP Law in 2016, it will reduce penalties for minors who purchase, consume, or are in possession of alcohol.  Starting January 1, 2018, first time offenders of the Minor in Possession (MIP) law will be guilty of a civil infraction instead of a misdemeanor. There will no longer be any threat of a first offense landing on a young adult’s record. When the law takes effect they will instead pay a fine. Even though the first offense is reduced, it should still be taken seriously due to the long lasting effects and the possibility of future violations.

First time offenders could be fined $100.00, ordered to participate in substance use disorder services, undergo substance abuse screening, and perform community service.  If the minor is charged with a second MIP, the offense increases to a misdemeanor.  This means that if a minor receives a second MIP charge, it is a criminal offense.  If charged with a misdemeanor, the minor could face up to 30 days in jail and be charged $200.00.  Again, the minor could be ordered to participate in substance use disorder services, undergo substance abuse screening, and perform community service.  If the minor has violated the MIP law more than 2 times, he/she can face up to 60 days in jail and be charged $500.00.  The minor can be ordered to participate in substance use disorder services, undergo substance abuse screening, and perform community service.  After a second or third violation, the minor’s licenses can be suspended.

Concerned about Michigan’s New MIP Law? Thousands of minors are charged with MIP violations every year.  For more information about the Michigan Minor in Possession (MIP) law and how to protect yourself, call us at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

0

Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets

Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets

Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets

College Football Season: Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets

The college football season has started and with that students are being ticketed while tailgating.  Whether you’re studying at Wayne State University, Michigan State University, the University of Michigan or another Michigan college, these tickets are very common but they should be taken seriously.  Even a single conviction on your record can have an impact on your future employment and educational opportunities.

Individuals may be charged with Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets due to tailgating activities including Minor in Possession of Alcohol, open intox, assault, and Urinating in Public.  One of the most common is Minor in Possession of Alcohol.   The exact crime you are charged with depends on the location you are when you are ticketed but all have serious consequences including fines and possible jail time.

Civil infraction tickets may also be handed out for handling open containers of alcohol.  Open bottles and cans of alcohol are sometimes permitted on certain campuses during football games, however if you step off of campus or have an open container other than on game day, you may be written a ticket.  It is important to know the rules in your area because, even though civil infraction tickets are typically not associated with jail time, tickets for handling an open container of alcohol can be costly.

If you have been written a ticket while tailgating,

Charged with a Tailgating Misdemeanor Tickets: Don’t take a risk on your rights—call one of our criminal defense attorneys at (248) 398-7100  for a free consultation or contact us with a private message, we can help you put this in your past quickly, so you can move on with your life.

For information about specific charges see the links below:

0

Troy Michigan Same Sex Divorce Attorney

Troy Michigan Same Sex Divorce Attorney

Troy Michigan Same Sex Divorce Attorney

Looking for a Troy Michigan Same Sex Divorce Attorney? We can help.

Has the State of Michigan made it difficult for you to obtain a divorce?  Previously it was difficult to obtain a same sex divorce in this state.  This was because couples would generally marry in another state and move back to Michigan.  However, since Michigan recognized gay marriages as void ad initio, they would not consider there to be jurisdiction to issue a divorce.  This left people with the option to set up residency in other states in order to qualify to file for divorce jurisdictionally, which takes 60-90 days and an intent to reside there indefinitely.

Fortunately for these couples, the recent United States Supreme Court ruling Obergefell v. Hodges mandated that all state governments recognize gay marriage.  This is not only good for unmarried gay couples in Michigan, as they now have that option, but also for gay couples trying to legally obtain a divorce without jumping through legal hoops and disrupting their lives and those of their children.

Divorce is always a last resort, but for some families it is simply the only option and often what’s best for both parents to keep a healthy relationship with the children.  The previous process was abusive to couples seeking a divorce not only because of the difficulty of attempting to claim residency elsewhere, or incredibly long period of time it took to do so, but the strain on the personal lives of everyone involved and the damage done to a relationship that could have been maintained on good terms the process were more civil.

The difficulty of the process was the product of legal technicalities and inconsistencies.  A couple getting divorced can only do so through the state government of which they claim residency.  If a gay couple were married in another state and then moved to Michigan, their residency would change to Michigan but the state would not recognize their marriage because the state constitution forbade it.  Because the state did not recognize their marriage, they could not issue a divorce because technically the marriage didn’t exist.  This is what would force couples to claim residency elsewhere, a process that can have a tremendous strain on the personal, professional, and family lives of those involved.

However, this is no longer the case.  Now that the State of Michigan recognizes gay marriages, they also will issue divorces for those couples with no other option.  Although the process has become easier, it is still important for those seeking divorce to obtain an attorney.  Divorce law can be difficult to navigate, and it is vital to a party to have an experienced attorney guiding you through the process.  If you are facing a divorce in the State of Michigan,

Looking for a Troy Michigan Same Sex Divorce Attorney? If you need assistance in these or any area of other family law, read below for more info, call us at (248) 398-7100  for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

For information on specific family law issues please see:

0

People v Rea: Drunk Driving Updates with Troy Michigan Expert DUI Attorneys

People v Rea: Drunk Driving Updates with Troy Michigan Expert DUI

People v Rea: Drunk Driving Updates with Troy Michigan Expert DUI

People v Rea: Drunk Driving Updates with Troy Michigan Expert DUI

Attorneys Recently the Michigan Court of Appeals heard a case involving an individual charged with operating while intoxicated after he drove drunk on his driveway.   In People v Gino Robert Rea, the court determined that the charges of operating while intoxicated pursuant to MCL 257.625 should be dismissed because the defendant was not operating his vehicle in an area generally accessible to motor vehicles.

The court relied heavily on the facts of this case which were that a police officer responding to a neighbor’s complaint watched the defendant back his car out of his detached garage about 25 feet before stopping next to his house.  He then pulled his car back up into his garage and was arrested when he was walking back to his home.  His driveway is quite long and the officer admitted that defendant did not pull the car out past the front of his home at any point.

The relevant language of the drunk driving law is as follows, “A… person shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles…if the person is operating while intoxicated.”

The court found that the defendant’s actions in this case did not violate this statute as the upper portion of the Defendant’s private driveway is not an area that is “generally accessible to motor vehicles”.  Rather, this area of a driveway is a place that is only accessible to a small group of vehicles: namely the homeowner or his or her guests.

Importantly, the court noted that another set of facts could yield a different outcome.  Specifically, the court postulated that the bottom of a private driveway may be an area that qualifies as a “place open to the general public” or a place “generally accessible to motor vehicles.”  Therefore, someone driving on the bottom portion of the driveway near the road could possibly be charged with operating while intoxicated.

Overall, this case stands for the idea that the area at the top of the driveway is not an area that is open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles so homeowners driving in this area cannot be charged with operating while intoxicated.  However, the question of whether the area at the bottom of the driveway is open to the general public has not been decided.  Homeowners should take care to avoid driving at all when under the influence of alcohol, including on the area at the bottom of the driveway.

If you have been charged with operating while intoxicated or “drunk driving”, contact the Troy Michigan Expert DUI Attorneys of Garmo & Kiste, PLC at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.   This is an intricate area of law and it is best to consult with experienced attorneys such as ours to ensure your case is handled properly.

For information about specific charges see the links below:

0

Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits

Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits

Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits

Do you need an attorney to help with a Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits? We can Help.

Are you being sued by National Collegiate Trust or Shermeta law group of Rochester / Troy Michigan for past due student loans? If so, you are not alone. Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits have become increasingly common as National Collegiate Trust has been aggressively pursuing delinquent student loans from many former students in the State of Michigan.

National Collegiate Student Loan Trust is a Delaware Trust that holds private student loans guaranteed by TERI not the federal government. National Collegiate Trust purchases these private loans from the original lenders. National Collegiate Student Loan Trust Is not the originator of the loan but rather they have purchased the loan from your lender. The originators are well known banks, among others:

  • JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
  • Charter One Bank, N.A.
  • Bank of America, N.A.
  • RBS Citizens, N.A.
  • Union Federal Savings Bank

These loans were structured with the assistance of the First Marblehead Corporation. The First Marblehead Corporation is an education loan finance company that  owns TERI. The Education Resources Institute, Inc. (TERI), is a nonprofit organization that claims to be the largest private student loan guarantor in the US.

They expect that you will not do anything if you are sued by them. If you do not act on this lawsuit, a default judgment will likely be issued against you and you will most likely owe the full amount. National Collegiate Trust will try to collect the judgment against you through garnishing your bank accounts, wages, tax refunds, even through property liens and/or seizures.

To avoid Judgments, garnishments, seizures, and other collection activities, contact the attorneys at Garmo & Kiste, PLC at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or send us a private message so that we may take action as soon as possible.

If you have questions about Michigan National Collegiate Student Loan Trust lawsuits, or you are being contacted in regards to paying a student loan by National Collegiate Student Loan Trust or Shermeta law group of Rochester / Troy Michigan please contact Garmo & Kiste, PLC at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

If National Collegiate Trust or Shermeta law group of Rochester / Troy Michigan is taking legal action against you to collect the debt, you will need an attorney that can navigate the unique legal landscape of debt collection.  The legal process can be confusing and frustrating even when debt collectors conduct themselves legitimately.  The attorneys at Garmo & Kiste, PLC can do just that.  We regularly handle debt collections cases concerning National Collegiate Trust, Shermeta law group of Rochester / Troy Michigan, and other student loan debt collectors and have worked for debt collectors in the past.  This gives us a unique advantage because we understand both sides of litigation.

For more information about National Collegiate Trust or Shermeta law group of Rochester / Troy Michigan and Debt Collection Defense or to retain Garmo & Kiste, PLC, call us at (248) 398-7100 for a free consultation or contact us with a private message.

More subject specific information, please click on the following Article links:

1 2 3 19