Bankruptcy

McMichael represented the debtors, a commercial manufacturer and its subsidiaries, in three jointly-administered Chapter 11 reorganizations in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

McMichael was part of a team that represented the Secured Noteholders in a complex Chapter 11 bankruptcy of a television station.

McMichael was the principal drafter of a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in a bankruptcy case involving a preference action.

Civil rights law

McMichael was part of a team that represented SEPTA in a Section 1983 case brought by an employee challenging SEPTA’s random drug testing program. She was the principal drafter of post-trial motions and appellate briefs in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which led to a reversal of the judgment against SEPTA and the award of a new trial.

Commercial law

McMichael was second-chair trial counsel representing the plaintiff corporation in a case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania seeking to enjoin a corporate acquisition.

Employment law

McMichael was lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in an action for breach of an employment contract that she tried before a jury in federal court.

Federal civil procedure

McMichael was the main drafter of a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in a case involving the two dismissal exception of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.

Medical malpractice

McMichael represented the appellant physician on an appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court in a medical malpractice action. The case involved the filing of multiple appellate briefs in the Pennsylvania Superior Court and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Products liability

McMichael represented the appellant in an appeal following the trial of a products liability case against an airplane manufacturer.

Torts

McMichael was on a team representing a corporate defendant in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in an action for malicious prosecution, malicious abuse of process, malicious misuse of criminal proceedings, and conspiracy.

The action was filed in Pennsylvania but concerned the defendant’s alleged conduct in a case litigated in Texas.
McMichael analyzed the case and concluded that because the underlying litigation was in Texas, Pennsylvania conflicts-of-law analysis required the court to apply Texas law.

McMichael drafted a motion for summary judgment for the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, arguing that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under Texas law. The court granted summary judgment for the defendant. Plaintiff appealed.

McMichael briefed the appeal to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. The Superior Court affirmed, holding that Texas law applied and that plaintiff failed to state a claim under Texas law.