Lauri focuses her practice on representing municipalities, as well as malpractice defense for healthcare professionals.
An effective and accomplished litigator, Lauri is respected for her high degree of professionalism and her ability to achieve consistent favorable outcomes, having a 100 percent success rate at trial.
For more than 20 years, Lauri has served as defense counsel for hospitals, physicians and other licensed healthcare professionals in claims of medical malpractice.
Lauri also has considerable experience representing municipalities in state and federal court. As an aggressive litigator, her strategy includes setting cases up for early dismissal. She has successfully achieved that result in numerous cases alleging employment discrimination, violation of civil and constitutional rights, police misconduct, governmental liability and gross negligence by government agents and employees. She also defends municipalities against lawsuits claiming sexual harassment and violations of the Wistleblowers Protection Act, Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information Act. She has been a speaker at municipal conferences regarding such topics.
Lauri obtained her law degree from University of Detroit Mercy, and her undergraduate degree from Michigan State University.
- American Bar Association
- State Bar of Michigan
- Negligence Law Section
- Litigation Section
- Family Law Section
- Oakland County Bar Association
Bar and Court Admissions
- University of Detroit Mercy School of Law, J.D.
- Michigan State University, B.A.
Insights & News
September 17, 2020
April 2, 2020
Defended an emergency medicine physician to no cause for action against a claim alleging failure to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy resulting in loss of fertility
Defended a physician, physician assistant and nurse to no cause for action against a plaintiff claiming to have broken his neck allegedly due to improper care while in an Observation Unit
Successfully convinced trial court that experts retained by the opposition and the testimony offered by them failed to meet admissibility requirements, resulting in the expert being stricken and the case being dismissed, given the absence of reliable expert testimony to support the case