Category Archives: Legal Articles

“Going the Distance”: Pennsylvania Passes “Four Foot” Bicycle Passing Law.

Missouri Cycling Advocate on the New “Four Foot” Passing Law in Pennsylvania.

There is no IQ test required to drive a car or ride a bike… but seeing accident after accident in St. Louis and the surrounding area in Missouri, I am glad to see the continued nationwide movement to pass “safe passing bills”.  Every cyclist knows how it feels to have a car, truck or bus pass too close for comfort.   I know many who have been hit by cars and survived to tell their tale, but not all.  How many cyclists have experienced the “red pickup truck” cursing at them as they are passed on a lonely country road wide enough for all to be happy. Or how about the typical teenage girl in the Dodge Neon, texting her girlfriends, who turns straight into a cyclist.  Motorists often misjudge the space needed due to inattentiveness, lack of the expectation of a cyclist, and lack of experience driving by cyclists. To make roads safer for bicyclists and other vulnerable road users, many states have passed “safe passing bills”  to provide bicyclists the protection of law from passing motor vehicles.

On Tuesday, January 24, 2012, the Pennsylvania Senate voted to pass HB170, a bill that would require motorists allow a minimum of four feet when passing a cyclists on the roadway.  If you review the bill, note that it refers to bikes as pedalcycles… not to be confused with motorcycles.  The bill passed the Senate in a 45-5 vote and is now awaiting signature by their governor so it may become law.  Once signed into law the Pennsylvania bill will require that:

  • Bicycles in Pennsylvania must be operated in the right hand lane, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of roadway.
  • This does not apply to a bicycle using any portion of the road due to unsafe surface conditions.
  • Motorists must overtake a bicycle with no less than four feet between the vehicle and the bicycle and at a “prudent reduced speed”.
  • No turn by a motorist may interfere with a bicycle proceeding straight.

Here is the link if you would like to read the bill:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2011&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0170&pn=0114

The “four foot” law is significant in that most states that have passed safe passing laws have limited it to three feet.  Three foot laws have come under scrutiny for still being too narrow.  Some driver’s education handbooks instruct to give 6 feet of room when passing a cyclist.

No Three or Four Foot Law in Missouri: Must Pass at “Safe Distance”

Insurance Company lobbyists have continued their success in Missouri in blocking a three or four foot passing laws.  They fear a rise in claims if a clear-cut law is passed.  Currently, Missouri has no specific number of feet that you must overtake a bicycle, but there is a specific  vehicle-overtaking-bicycle law.  Overtaking  law, “304.678.  Distance to be maintained  when overtaking a bicycle.”, (here)  states “The operator of a motor vehicle overtaking a bicycle proceeding in the  same direction on the roadway, as defined in section 300.010, RSMo, shall leave a safe distance, when passing the bicycle, and shall maintain clearance  until safely past the overtaken bicycle.” (italics added)  Penalty: “Any person who violates the  provisions of this section is guilty of an infraction unless an accident is  involved in which case it shall be a class C misdemeanor.

If you have any questions about Missouri bicycle accident law, contact Michelle M. Funkenbusch, St. Louis Trial Lawyer and Cycling Advocate, 314-799-6602.  Michelle provides free bicycle law education seminars to the community, high schools, scout troops, and adult social organizations. If you would like Michelle to speak to your group, please do not hesitate to contact her.

Finding Private Safe Roads in Missouri For Cycling is a Challenge

 

City Trial Lawyer “Goes Country” and Explains Why Farm Accident Cases Are Sometimes Filed in Civil Court and Sometimes In the Division of Worker’s Compensation:

Farm Accidents: Worker’s Compensation or Civil Lawsuit?

I may be a St. Louis City trial lawyer, but I have two pairs of Justin Roper boots, a pair of Rockies jeans, a four star beaver-fur cowboy hat and yes…. farm accident cases.  I fully admit that twenty years ago, I didn’t know what a combine was, but having farmers in my extended family forced me into the world of cow patties and four wheelers.   I have since been exposed to cases involving falls in grain bins, machinery mishaps, legs being torn off by augers, bodies being sliced by cables that break and fly through the air, etc.  Farm work is dangerous and no place for my city lawyer stiletto heels.  But, farms are a place for a big city trial lawyer’s experience and I’ll share a little of that experience with you today concerning where a suit/claim is filed when a farm accident occurs.

There are more than 2 million farms in the United States.  Farms vary greatly in their size from small, family-run farms to large production facilities with million dollar sales.  No matter the kind of accident on a farm, the first question is whether we file a civil suit in a court of law or file a workers compensation claim. And the answer is…. it depends.  Even though you may have been injured on the job, not all farm accidents are covered by Missouri Worker’s Compensation laws.  In ’78, Missouri amended its worker’s compensation laws related to farming.  These laws created an exemption for employers of farm labor from carrying workers’ compensation insurance, meaning your injury case would be filed in a civil court (the kind of court where car accident cases are normally filed).  However, farm employers of non-farm labor are required to carry worker’s compensation insurance if they have five or more employees. If laborers work more than 5-1/2 consecutive work days per year, then each counts as an employee.

Needless to say, it is not easy to determine where to file a claim/lawsuit and it most likely requires the expertise of a Missouri farm accident trial lawyer.  For example, the average employee may not know that last year the Court of Appeal in Missouri in State ex. rel. KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Co. v. Cook, — S.W.3d —-, 2011 WL 4031146 (Mo.App. W.D. 2011)held that occupational disease claims (like carpal tunnel syndrome, cubital tunnel syndrome, & mesothelioma), are not subject to workers’ compensation’s exclusive remedy. Under the Cook decision, an employee with a work-related occupational disease may now choose between bringing a workers’ compensation claim with the Division of Worker’s Compensation or file a lawsuit for damages.

Pros & Cons of Farm Accidents Being Covered By Missouri Workers’ Compensation:

The Pros of Your Farm Accident Case Being Handled Under the Worker’s Compensation System:

In addition to being a simpler and more flexible system as far as evidence goes, worker’s compensation gives employees way more assurance they will get some compensation for their injuries than if the case was filed in a civil court.  In fact, unlike a civil case, you can potentially get temporary weekly disability benefits, medical paid for by the employer, and reimbursement for expenses… all before a formal administrative hearing (trial) on the case.

A huge benefit in worker’s compensation is that you do not have to prove your employer was negligent, like you do in civil court.  In fact, you can even be entirely at fault and recover under worker’s compensation!  While you can be penalized for violating a safety statute or using drugs or alcohol on the job, you are generally way better off  in workers compensation if the accident was your own fault.  You also avoid unpredictable juries and strict judges who throw out evidence that does not conform to the strict rules of civil suits.

As a worker’s compensation lawyer, I can generally tell you a range of what various injuries are worth in the workers’ compensation arena, assuming we know your average weekly wage and your permanent disabilities related to your injury.  This predictability is the benefit of the Missouri Worker’s Compensation system. But, keep in mind, employers are benefiting from worker’s compensation coverage too.  They are limiting their liability for farm accidents to the coverage under the workers compensation insurance policies. Once again, farm accident law is tricky and you should consult with a Missouri farm accident trial lawyer, like myself to analyze your claim.

The Cons of Your Farm Accident Case Being Under the Worker’s Compensation System:

The biggest disadvantage to the farm employee (who often sustains major injuries) is that you have no chance of the million dollar verdicts you see in farm accident cases filed in civil court.  The value of your case if it is a major injury is often less in worker’s compensation hearings.  You get no compensation for pain and suffering.  No compensation for the suffering of your spouse when he/she had to be your caregiver.  No jury of your peers to feel sorry for you.  Worker’s compensation is often an almost emotionless system of numbers and charts.  The Administrative Law Judges at the Division of Worker’s Compensation have generally seen every type of injury many times and usually place an injury in a specific disability range (which predicts the dollar value) to be consistent in their rulings and opinions. No run-away verdict is possible.

There is also a shorter statute of limitations in workers’ compensation (2 or 3 years depending on the facts) than in civil personal injury suits (5 years).Worker’s

In the workers’ compensation system, workplace exposure to a hazard must be the “prevailing factor” of the injury in farm accident cases and farm occupational disease cases… not just the proximate cause like in civil court.  You can thank Missouri tort reform in 2005 for that higher standard.  And no, I won’t be sending a Christmas card to Blunt anytime soon. With a pro-employer legislature in Missouri right now, it would not be surprising to see additional amendments that make worker’s compensation cases more difficult to prove.

Farming  is consistently one of the most hazardous industries.

Each day, about 500 farm employees experience injuries.

In an average year, 110 American farm workers are crushed to death by tractor rollovers. 

I represent those men and women injured in all forms of farm accidents.

If you, or someone you love, has suffered serious injuries, or you have lost a loved one to wrongful death, I can help.  Call me today to learn about your rights and options in your potential farm accident case. 

Michelle M. Funkenbusch 314-799-6602.

A Win for the Little Man: Missouri Debt Collection Cases are Harder to Prove for Companies Who Sell Debts

St. Louis Trial Attorney Explains New Evidentiary Case Law:

The Missouri Supreme Court Made It More Difficult to Prove Standing To Collect Debts.

Those defendants who owe debts that have been sold to other companies won a BIG verdict in their favor this week. In a ruling on January 17, 2012, the Missouri Supreme Court mandated strict proof of “standing to sue” by the debt-buying companies.  The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously said that the debt collection company failed to prove it had “standing” to collect a credit card debt from the debtor. Companies cannot just walk in court with a lawyer and say you owe a debt and get a verdict.  They must have evidentiary proof of “standing”.  Standing, sometimes referred to as standing to sue, is the name of the doctrine that focuses on whether a prospective plaintiff can prove they have some personal or corporate legal interest in the outcome of a lawsuit, not just a general public interest.

The Court held, in this simple collection lawsuit, that a debt buyer’s representative is NOT competent to lay foundation for transactional documents created by the original creditor.   So think this through…. the original creditor, who now has no interest in the debt or lawsuit, would have to produce a custodian of records(likely in another state) in order for the trial court to receive the debt assignment documents into evidence.  This makes collection and winning at trial MUCH more difficult for debt buying companies who have no control over the original creditors.  Why would the original creditor be interested in sending a representative across the country to prove the buiness records are legitimate, unless of course debt buying companies contractually require them to cooperate in collection actions.

This is a huge win for all of you that owe debts and are defendants in cases filed by mortgage companies and credit card companies who have sold your debt over and over.  Each time there was an assignment of the debt, there must be a custodian of records from that company to testify as to the business records related to the assignment.  That makes a LOT of work for the Plaintiff for collecting on small debts. The cost of proof (flying in witnesses) could easily be more than the debts.  The fallout of this Court decision may mean that those savvy debtors who hire trial attorneys will win at trial, as the lawyer will know how to object to evidence or the lack of evidence of standing.

The rule of law to take away from this case is that in cases that involve a party attempting to recover on an account owed to some other party, proof of an assigment of the account, and each subsequent assignment, is essential to a recovery.

This case has been closely watched by the debt-buying industry, which purchases debts that frequently are sold over and over and may have spotty records.  Lobbyist groups for creditors wrote numerous briefs to support the debt buying company’s case on appeal.  Despite the corporate push to keep it easy to prove debts, the Missouri Supreme Court required strict proof from these debt buying companies.  Remind me to send the Supreme Court a Christmas card.

For more information, the case is CACH LLC v. Jon J. Askew, SC91780.  If you would like to hear the oral arguments or see some of the supporting documents and briefs… click here… http://www.courts.mo.gov/SUP/index.nsf/fe8feff4659e0b7b8625699f0079eddf/05b1ab4a57ec67848625792f00750254?OpenDocument   

From my experience as a general practitioner, people like to do their own research on debt collection law, as they are reluctant to tell anyone the predicament they are in.  As a service to the public, the staff of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has prepared the following complete text of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p.  http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre27.pdf .  You might find it helpful if debt colletors are after you.  If you believe you are a victim of wrongful collection practices and want your right to a trial, contact St. Louis trial attorney Michelle M. Funkenbusch at 314-799-6602.

Personal Portable Breathalyzer Tests To Help Avoid Tickets For DUI

As we continue through this holiday season in St. Louis, consider buying your favorite partier a portable breathalyzer for $30.00 to $100.00. While they may not be as accurate as police testing for DUI, they are valuable in helping someone realize they need to call a cab. I regularly represent people with DUI’s who believe they were not drunk… until we read the police report and see their BAC levels.

How do breathalyzers show your alcohol level during DUI testing? Alcohol (ethanol) shows up in your breath because it gets absorbed from the mouth, throat, stomach and intestines into your bloodstream.  Ethanol­ is not digested upon absorption, nor chemically changed in the bloodstream. As the blood travels through your lungs, some of the ethanol moves across the membranes of the lung’s air sacs (which are called alveoli) into the air.  The concentration of the alcohol in the alveolar air is related to the concentration of the alcohol in the blood. For you science and math people… the ratio of breath alcohol to blood alcohol is 2,100:1. This means that 2,100 milliliters (ml) of alveolar air will contain the same amount of alcohol as 1 ml of blood.

As the alcohol in your alveolar air is exhaled, police can detect it by a breath alcohol testing device. The American Medical Association touts that a person can become impaired when the blood alcohol level hits as little as 0.05. 0.08 is the legal limit in Missouri.  If a person’s BAC measures 0.08, it means that there are 0.08 grams of alcohol per 100 ml of blood.

While we are often able to resolve a first DUI in the St. Louis area with a Suspended Imposition of Sentence (which results in no conviction if you complete a long probationary period and other requirements), you will still have to face a potential administrative suspension through the Department of Revenue.

If you have questions about DUI tickets in the Greater St. Louis area, please do not hesitate to contact me at 314-799-6602.  Be safe everyone!

 

© 2011 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.

TEST YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF BICYCLE LAW

As a Missouri expert in bicycle law, here are the top five misconceptions about the law as it relates to cyclists. How many did you get right? -Michelle

 
#1  Under the law, bikes are too slow to be on the road.
 
ANSWER: FALSE. 
 Under Section 307.191, Missouri state law says that you CAN operate your bike at LOWER than the posted speed or slower than the flow of traffic on a street or highway, or you may operate on the shoulder.  This allows but does not require bikes to ride on the shoulder.  In other words, those who suggest bikes cannot be on the road because they can’t maintain a minimum speed limit are flat out wrong.  Bikes cannot however be on the INTERSTATE in Missouri.
 
#2  Cyclists break the law when they ride side by side on the road. 
 
ANSWER: FALSE, UNLESS “IMPEDING TRAFFIC”
Under Section 307.190, bicyclists may ride abreast (side by side) only when not impeding traffic., i.e. they must ride single file if impeding traffic.  They must also ride as far to the right as is safe.  The problem is that motorists then think they can squeeze by in the same lane and barely miss hitting cyclists.  If the lane is too narrow to safely share between a bicycle and a motor vehicle, the bicycle may move towards the center of the lane so as to discourage motor vehicles from dangerously squeezing past in the same narrow lane.   If you see a bicyclist riding in the middle of the lane in this way, be patient and view the road from the perspective of the cyclist as he or she may be following the law.  Slow and wait behind the bicyclist until it is safe to move into the next lane to pass.  Often there is debris in the shoulder of the road or a bike lane ends where there is no shoulder, requiring the cyclist to enter the lane of traffic.
 
#3  Cyclists should ride on sidewalks instead of roads when they are in a business district with nice wide sidewalks.
 
ANSWER: FALSE
Under Section 300.347 of the Missouri State statutes, it is against the law to ride your bike on a sidewalk in a business district.  Cyclists are required to share the road with cars and allow pedestrians to use the sidewalks.
 
 
#4  Cyclists don’t have to follow any rules on the road as they are not motor vehicles.
 
ANSWER: FALSE
Under 307.188, cyclists have all the rights and DUTIES applicable to motor vehicles. This means cyclists are required to obey traffic control devices.
 
#5  Missouri drivers must use the “highest degree of care” while driving next to cyclists.
 
ANSWER: TRUE
The standard of care to operate a motor vehicle is one of the greatest in Missouri. If a driver of a motor vehicle hits a cyclist, the driver can have both criminal charges and a civil case against him or her. In the civil case for money damages, the driver’s attorney will have to show the driver used the HIGHEST degree of care in operating his or her vehicle. This means you must take more care in driving than is required of a brain surgeon operating on your head, an engineer building a bridge or a day care worker watching your child. You must take more care in driving than doing anything else in life. Slowing down on known cycling routes is MANDATORY to use the highest degree of care. You cannot drive the speed limit if you cannot see around corners and over hills to avoid slow moving vehicles, like cyclists. While bicyclists are also required to operate their bikes in a safe manner, as motor vehicles can weigh from 3000(cars) to 80,000 (tractor-trailers)pounds, what amounts to the highest degree of care can vary. If you know it takes you 100 feet to stop at the speed you are going, you may be required to drive slower to meet the highest degree of care standard.
Below is a list of all the laws that pertain to cyclists. Please take a moment to review them!

 

Missouri State Statutes Regarding Bicycles July 2005

300.347. Riding bicycle on sidewalks, limitations – motorized bicycles prohibited.
(1) No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk within a business district;
(2) Whenever any person is riding a bicycle upon a sidewalk, such person shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian and shall give audible signal before overtaking and passing such pedestrian;
(3) No person shall ride a motorized bicycle upon a sidewalk.
300.350. Riding bicycles, sleds, roller skates, by attaching to another vehicle, prohibited.
No person riding upon any bicycle, motorized bicycle, coaster, roller skates, sled or toy vehicle shall attach the same or himself to any vehicle upon a roadway.
 
300.330. Bicycle lane regulations
The driver of a motor vehicle shall not drive within any sidewalk area except as a permanent or temporary driveway. A designated bicycle lane shall not be obstructed by a parked or standing motor vehicle or other stationary object. A motor vehicle may be driven in a designated bicycle lane only for the purpose of a lawful maneuver to cross the lane or to provide for safe travel. In making an otherwise lawful maneuver that requires traveling in or crossing a designated bicycle lane, the driver of a motor vehicle shall yield to any bicycle in the lane. As used in this section, the term “designated bicycle lane” shall mean a portion of the roadway or highway that has been designated by the governing body having jurisdiction over such roadway or highway by striping with signing or striping with pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicycles.
 
300.411 and 304.678 Overtake bicycles at a safe distance
(1) The operator of a motor vehicle overtaking a bicycle proceeding in the same direction on the roadway, as defined in section 300.010, RSMo, shall leave a safe distance, when passing the bicycle, and shall maintain clearance until safely past the overtaken bicycle.
(2) Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of an infraction unless an accident is involved in which case it shall be a class C misdemeanor.
 
307.180. Bicycle and motorized bicycle, defined. As used in sections 307.180 to 307.193:
(1) The word bicycle shall mean every vehicle propelled solely by human power upon which any person may ride, having two tandem wheels, or two parallel wheels and one or two forward or rear wheels, all of which are more than fourteen inches in diameter, except scooters and similar devices;
(2) The term motorized bicycle shall mean any two or three-wheeled device having an automatic transmission and a motor with a cylinder capacity of not more than fifty cubic centimeters, which produces less than three gross brake horsepower, and is capable of propelling the device at a maximum speed of not more than thirty miles per hour on level ground. A motorized bicycle shall be considered a motor vehicle for purposes of any homeowners- or renters- insurance policy.
 
307.183. Brakes required.
Every bicycle and motorized bicycle shall be equipped with a brake or brakes which will enable its driver to stop the bicycle or motorized bicycle within twenty-five feet from a speed of ten
miles per hour on dry, level, clean pavement.
 
307.185 Lights and reflectors, when required – standards to be met.
Every bicycle and motorized bicycle when in use on a street or highway during the period from one-half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise shall be equipped with the following:
(1) A front-facing lamp on the front or carried by the rider which shall emit a white light visible at night under normal atmospheric conditions on a straight, level, unlighted roadway at five hundred feet;
(2) A rear-facing red reflector, at least two square inches in reflective surface area, or a rear-facing red lamp, on the rear which shall be visible at night under normal atmospheric conditions on a straight, level, unlighted roadway when viewed by a vehicle driver under the lower beams of vehicle head-lights at six hundred feet;
(3) Reflective material and/or lights visible from the front and the rear on any moving part of the bicyclists, pedals, crank arms, shoes or lower leg, visible from the front and the rear at night under normal atmospheric conditions on a straight, level, unlighted roadway when viewed by a vehicle driver under the lawful lower beams of vehicle headlights at two hundred feet; and
(4) Reflective material and/or lights visible on each side of the bicycle or bicyclist visible at night under normal atmospheric conditions on a straight, level, unlighted roadway when viewed by a vehicle driver under the lawful lower beams of vehicle headlights at three hundred feet. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to motorized bicycles which comply with National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration regulations relating to reflectors on motorized bicycles.
 
307.188. Rights and duties of bicycle and motorized bicycle riders. Every person riding a bicycle or motorized bicycle upon a street or highway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle as provided by chapter 304, RSMo, except as to special regulations in sections 307.180 to 307.193 and except as to those provisions of chapter 304, RSMo, which by their nature can have no application.
 
307.190. Riding to right, required for bicycles and motorized bicycles.
Every person operating a bicycle or motorized bicycle at less than the posted speed or slower than the flow of traffic upon a street or highway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as safe, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction, except when making a left turn, when avoiding hazardous conditions, when the lane is too narrow to share with another vehicle or when on a one-way street. Bicyclists may ride abreast when not impeding other vehicles.
 
307.191. Shoulder riding, allowed but not required for bicyclist operators
(1) A person operating a bicycle at less than the posted speed or slower than the flow of traffic upon a street or highway may operate as described in section 307.190, or may operate on the shoulder adjacent to the roadway.
(2) A bicycle operated on a roadway, or the shoulder adjacent to a roadway, shall be operated in the same direction as vehicles are required to be driven upon the roadway.
(3) For purposes of this section and section 307.190, “roadway”, means that portion of a street or highway ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the berm or shoulder.
 
307.192. Bicyclists may signal right turn with right arm
The operator of a bicycle shall signal as required in section 304.019, RSMo, except that a signal by the hand and arm need not be given continuously if the hand is needed to control or operate the bicycle. An operator of a bicycle intending to turn the bicycle to the right shall signal as indicated in section 304.019, RSMo, or by extending such operator’s right arm in a horizontal position so that the same may be seen in front and in rear of the vehicle.
 
307.193. Penalty for violation.
Any person seventeen years of age or older who violates any provision of sections 307.180 to 307.193 is guilty of an infraction and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than five dollars nor more than twenty-five dollars. Such an infraction does not constitute a crime and conviction shall not give rise to any disability or legal disadvantage based on conviction of a criminal offense. If any person under seventeen years of age violates any provision of sections 307.180 to 307.193 in the presence of a peace officer possessing the duty and power of arrest for violation of the general criminal laws of the state or for violation of ordinances of counties or municipalities of the state, said officer may impound the bicycle or motorized bicycle involved for a period not to exceed five days upon issuance of a receipt to the child riding it or to its owner.
 
 
© 2011 The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC.  All Rights Reserved. These materials may not be reproduced in any way without the written permission of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch, LLC. This blog is designed to provide general information on the topic provided and is posted with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any legal or professional services. Although this post and the blog is prepared by a lawyer, it should not be used as a substitute for legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of The Law Offices of Michelle M. Funkenbusch should be sought privately.