Bill represents clients involved in appellate matters in Michigan including health care providers, municipalities, and corporations. As a distinguished appellate litigator with more than 11 years of experience, he partners directly with his clients throughout the entire appellate process, from the time the appeal is filed to post-judgment motions, if necessary. 

Bill couples his devotion to studying this niche of litigation with his extensive experience briefing and arguing before courts of all levels. He critically analyzes each strategy and argument used in the trial court with sensitivity toward how it is likely to be received in the appellate courts, and is skilled at expanding or contracting the argument when necessary. He is adept at merging the often disjointed trial court materials including discovery, pleadings, and hearing transcripts with a concise statement of the law to form a coherent, succinct, and persuasive argument on appeal.

By focusing his practice on appellate litigation, Bill's knowledge and experience orchestrating effective appeals and making strategic decisions is a valuable asset to his clients.

Bill lives in the Grand Rapids area with his wife, Sharon, who practices veterinary medicine, and their two children.

Education

• New York University, School of Continuing & Professional Studies (Certificate in Film Production, 1995) 
• Central Michigan University (B.A., summa cum laude, 1997)
• University of Michigan Law School (J.D., cum laude, 1999)

Admitted to Practice

• State Bar of Michigan, 2000
• U.S. District Court Western District of Michigan, 2001
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, 2001

Previous Professional Experience

• Law clerk to the Honorable Richard F. Suhrheinrich, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 2000-2001

Bill’s published cases include:

• Medical Malpractice - Notice of Intent
  Decker v Rochowiak, 287 Mich App 666; 791 NW2d 507 (2010)
• Municipal Land Use Liability
  Cummins v Robinson Twp, 283 Mich App 677; 770 NW2d 421 (2009) 
• Municipal Land Use
  42 USC 2000cc, et seq. - Great Lakes Society v Georgetown Charter Twp, 281 Mich App 396; 761 NW2d 371 (2008)
• Motor Vehicle Exception to Government Immunity
  Wesche v Mecosta County Road Commission, 480 Mich 75; 746 NW2d 847 (2008)
• Highway Exception to Government Immunity
  Rowland v Washtenaw County Road Commission, 477 Mich 197; 731 NW2d 41 (2007)
• Government Immunity and Seatbelt Statute
  Mann v St. Clair County Road Commission, 470 Mich 347; 681 NW2d 653 (2004)
• Commercial Premises Liability
  DeBusscher v Sam's East, Inc., 505 F3d 475 (6th Cir 2007)
• Fourth Amendment- Search and Seizure
  Widgren v Maple Grove Township, 429 F3d 575 (6th Cir 2005)
• Medical Malpractice- Notice of Intent
  Boodt v Borgess Medical Center, 272 Mich App 621; 728 NW2d 471 (2006)
• Medical Malpractice- Youth Tolling of Statute of Limitations
  Vega v Lakeland Hospitals, 267 Mich App 565; 705 NW2d 389 (2005)
• Venue
  Colucci v McMillan, 256 Mich App 88; 662 NW2d 87 (2003)

Client Successes for William L. Henn

• 10/1/2009
  In a case handled by Craig Noland in the trial court and Bill Henn in the appellate court, we represented a township that was sued by dozens of plaintiffs whose homes had been damaged by a severe flood of the Grand River. The defendant township, as a matter of public safety, suspended occupancy permits for the damaged houses. The plaintiffs argued that the government had wrongfully taken their property without just compensation by the suspension of their occupancy permits,
• 8/1/2009
  Craig Noland and Bill Henn successfully represented our township client in a case before the Court of Appeals. In this case, the plaintiff property owner claimed that the "vibrations" from sewer construction activities along the road right of way caused structural damage and rendered the building "unsafe." The plaintiff attempted to avoid a governmental immunity defense by claiming a "taking" without just compensation. The trial court denied our motion for summary disposition as to the taking claim, but the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff's claims did not constitute a taking, and that the case against the township should be dismissed.
• 7/1/2009
  Craig Neckers, Bill Henn, and Mark Gilchrist successfully represented our client, a divorce attorney, in a legal malpractice case that went before the Court of Appeals.
• 11/1/2008
  In the case of the Great Lakes Society v Georgetown Charter Township, plaintiff was represented by attorneys who specialize in pursuing claims against municipalities under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Initially, the trial judge granted summary disposition in favor of plaintiff. Bill Henn later briefed and argued the appeal. In a published opinion the Court reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in the township's favor. The opinion is very significant because it addresses the definition of "Church" for zoning purposes, and rejects significant RLUIPA and constitutional claims.
• 9/1/2008
  Carol Carlson and Bill Henn were successful in obtaining summary disposition for a hospital client, and in defending that ruling in the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. The case involved the death of a patient during a cardiac catheterization procedure. The Opinion issued by the Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff's Notice of Intent did not comply with the statutory requirements, and that therefore the subsequent Complaint and Affidavit of Merit did not toll the limitations period. This is a significant victory for defendants that overturns contrary Court of Appeals precedent and restores a defendant's ability to mount a meaningful challenge to a defective Notice of Intent.
• 6/1/2008
  Bill Henn successfully represented two government agencies in an appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court. As a result of those consolidated proceedings, the Court decided that the state's "motor vehicle exception" to governmental immunity, which creates liability only for bodily injury and property damage arising from the negligent operation of a government-owned motor vehicle, does not permit a spouse's claim for loss of consortium. A majority of the Justices concluded that because loss of consortium is not a "physical injury to the body," that the language of the motor vehicle exception does not waive immunity for such a claim. The Court also determined that the motor vehicle exception's bodily injury limitation trumps Michigan's wrongful death act, and therefore precludes the beneficiaries of a decedent's estate from recovering for the "loss of society and companionship" of the decedent.
• 10/1/2006
  Jon Vander Ploeg and Bill Henn successfully defeated a plaintiff’s motion for an emergency preliminary injunction to halt a County Road Commission’s right-of-way brush control program. They argued, and the Circuit Court agreed, that based on principles of constitutional law creating and governing the existence of the judicial branch of government, the plaintiffs lacked standing to obtain the relief requested.

Smith Haughey Publications

News for William L. Henn

1/13/2012
Smith Haughey Announces New Shareholder and Board Members

1/6/2011
Smith Haughey Announces New Shareholders and Board of Directors

8/24/2010
SHRR Presents Webinar About Changes to the Michigan No-Fault Act

1/14/2010
Smith Haughey Announces New CEO, Shareholders, and Board of Directors

12/18/2006
Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge Names New Shareholders

Professional Affiliations

• State Bar of Michigan
• Federal Bar Association - Western Michigan Chapter
• Michigan Defense Trial Counsel
• Defense Research Institute