Readers who are aware of my collective dissections list know that I differentiate between ‘pure boilerplate copy’ filings by the San Francisco law firm Sher Edling and “Sher Edling Assistance,” where the latter lawsuits are a small handful seemingly appearing to be independently written in a manner suggesting Sher Edling had no hand in composing them, but then later became directly associated with that firm. My initial prediction back in May 2024 was that Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel would be committing political suicide if she elected to bring that firm in as ‘assisting counsel,’ and my update 4½ months later detailed how she had indeed made that massively unwise decision official. Time would tell if the filing turned out to be just another filing that copied ’n pasted accusation content from prior Sher Edling filings. A good indicator it would was AG Nessel’s equally unwise choice of the secondary ‘assisting law firm’ of DiCello Levitt which – as I showed in my dissection of the Pennsylvania Bucks County v BP lawsuit – had essentially plagiarized its material straight out of Sher Edling’s Chicago v BP filing. Notwithstanding the presence of DiCello Levitt having ‘top billing’ as the assisting firm for Chicago, my dissection of that one showed how it was a typical Sher Edling boilerplate copy ’n paste effort, the latest in a long string of them at the time.

But while this new 1/23/25 Michigan v BP filing gives Sher Edling ‘top billing’ for its assistant firms, it doesn’t follow Sher Edling’s typical copy ’n paste template. Continue reading →