Summary
Michigan law requires that the electorate of a home-rule city democratically choose their own form of government, but in Lake City Michigan, the rights and will of the people have been usurped through unlawful appointments to local offices that reassigns powers specifically apportioned in the City Charter. In this request for a writ of quo warranto action, the current Mayor Cheryl Sellers-Seger spearheads the effort to ask the court to remove Patrick Smith City Administrator from that newly-created office (which changed the form of City governance without an election) on the basis that he was unlawfully appointed in contravention of Lake City’s Charter, and to remove from the Lake City Planning Commission’s membership former Mayor Craig Ardis and city employee Robyn Niles whose memberships on that commission violate the Commission’s own bylaws, Lake City’s Charter, and Michigan law.
Overview
Reason to Invest:
This litigation seeks to protect a fundamental principle of local self-government: that the people, not government officials, decide the form of government under which they live.
Michigan law reserves to voters the power to adopt and revise municipal charters. This case asks the court to examine whether Lake City's governing structure was effectively altered through administrative action and appointments without the approval of the electorate, and whether certain public officials currently occupy offices or positions contrary to governing law.
Supporters are not merely funding a local dispute. They are helping establish judicial guidance on government accountability, municipal charter compliance, conflicts of interest in public appointments, and the proper use of Michigan's quo warranto process when state officials decline to pursue enforcement.
A successful outcome could strengthen transparency and reinforce the principle that public offices must be filled according to law, not political convenience.
Team
Erick G. Kaardal
Contact Me: (612)-341-1074
Education University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, Illinois J.D. - 1992 Harvard College Honors: magna cum laude Honors: U.S. Army Reserve Officer Training Corps scholarship Major: Economics Bar Admissions Minnesota Wisconsin U.S. Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Central District of Illinois U.S. District Court Northern District of Iowa U.S. District Court District of Idaho U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Federal Claims U.S. Tax Court Representative Cases Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (U.S. Supreme Court victory 5-4), 2002 Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky (U.S. Supreme Court victory 7-2), 2018 Honors Outstanding Contribution to the Cause of Liberty, Institute for Justice Minnesota Lawyer, Lawyer of the Year, 2018 Life Legal Defense Foundation "Defender of Life" Award Winner – 2021 Pro-Bono Activities Republican Party of Minnesota, Past Secretary/Treasurer John Adams Society, Past Chairman Minnesota Chapter of the Federalist Society, Advisory Board Member Past Positions Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, PA - since January 1, 2000 Trimble & Associates, Ltd., Associate Attorney, 1994-1999 Faegre & Benson, Associate Attorney, 1992-1994 U.S. Army Reserves, Minnesota and Illinois National Guard, Field Artillery Officer, Captain (retired)
.jpg)
Elizabeth Nielsen
Contact Me: (612) 979-9791
Education University of Illinois College of Law, Illinois J.D. - 2022 Honors: magna cum laude Honors: Rickert Award for Excellence in Advocacy Honors: Paul M. Lisnek Award for Excellence and Ethics in Trial Advocacy Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois B.A. - 2014 Honors: summa cum laude Honors: Chancellor’s Scholar Major: Political Science Major: Theater Minor: French Bar Admissions Minnesota Michigan Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan
About: Project Pitch
The integrity of representative government depends on public officials following the laws that define their authority.
This case presents a question larger than one community: What remedy exists when citizens believe public offices are being occupied unlawfully and government structures are altered without voter approval, yet public prosecutors decline to act?
Michigan's quo warranto process exists precisely for such circumstances. State law permits citizens to seek leave of court to pursue these extraordinary actions when government officials charged with enforcement refuse to proceed. Before launching this effort, Mayor Cheryl Sellers-Seger submitted a detailed request supported by legal authorities, city records, ordinances, charter provisions, meeting minutes, and other documentary evidence to both the Michigan Attorney General and the Missaukee County Prosecutor. Both declined to prosecute.
The proposed litigation seeks judicial review of whether:
-
The appointment of the Lake City Administrator complied with the City's Charter and Michigan law;
-
The creation and implementation of that office unlawfully altered the City's voter-approved governmental structure;
-
Certain Planning Commission memberships violate Michigan law, local ordinances, or governing bylaws; and
-
Appropriate relief should be granted to restore compliance with governing law.
This project is not about partisan politics. It is about ensuring that government remains accountable to the laws that create it and to the voters who ultimately hold sovereign authority in local government. Every contribution helps provide citizens access to the courts to obtain answers that public officials have declined to pursue.
Organization Information (Could be law firm and/or non-profit):
Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P.A.
Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson represents clients in constitutional, governmental accountability, election, and public-interest litigation. The firm has extensive experience litigating matters involving governmental authority, statutory interpretation, constitutional rights, and public accountability.
Organization Information:
Milestones
Milestone 1: Exhausting Government Remedies
Status: Completed
Michigan law generally requires citizens seeking quo warranto relief to first request action from the appropriate public officials. A comprehensive legal and factual memorandum was submitted to both the Michigan Attorney General and the Missaukee County Prosecutor outlining the claims and supporting evidence. Both offices declined to pursue the matter, satisfying a key prerequisite for citizen-initiated litigation.
Monetary Hurdle: Completed
Milestone 2: Preparing and Filing Petition for Leave and Complaint
The legal team will finalize pleadings, organize exhibits, prepare the application for leave to bring a quo warranto action, and file all required documents with the court.
Work includes legal research, drafting, exhibit preparation, filing fees, service of process, and record compilation.
Monetary Hurdle: $10,000
Milestone 3: Court Review and Early Litigation
Following filing, the parties will brief threshold issues concerning standing, leave to proceed, jurisdiction, and the legal sufficiency of the claims. The legal team will respond to anticipated motions and present arguments supporting judicial review.
Monetary Hurdle: $15,000
Milestone 4: Discovery and Evidence Development
If the court authorizes the action to proceed, the parties will conduct targeted discovery, obtain government records, review appointment documents, examine meeting records, and develop evidence necessary to resolve disputed factual issues.
Monetary Hurdle: $20,000
Milestone 5: Summary Judgment Proceedings
Because the principal issues involve interpretation of municipal charters, ordinances, statutes, and undisputed public records, the case may be appropriate for resolution through dispositive motions. Funding supports briefing, legal research, evidentiary submissions, and court appearances.
Monetary Hurdle: $15,000
Milestone 6: Trial and Final Judgment
If factual disputes remain, the matter will proceed through trial preparation and final adjudication. This phase includes witness preparation, evidentiary presentation, and post-trial briefing.
Monetary Hurdle: $50,000