Judge Borrello was elected to the 10th Circuit Court in 2016. Judge Borrello handles both criminal and civil cases for the Saginaw County Circuit Court and also presides over the Saginaw County Recovery Court with Judge Gafkay. Prior to taking the bench, Judge Borrello served as city attorney for the city of Saginaw at the law firm Gilbert, Smith, & Borrello. He also served as the Interim Deputy City Manager, Director of Public Utilities, and as the Saginaw County civil counsel. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan and Juris Doctorate from Seattle University School of Law.
For attorneys who have never been to your court, what is your check-in process?
Our check-in process is quite simple. If appearing via Zoom, contact my judicial assistant (JA) prior to the date of the hearing (get stipulation if necessary). I rarely deny a request to appear over Zoom. In person, simply meet with my JA, who is in the courtroom, and tell her your schedule, and I will do my best to accommodate it. For example, if you are scheduled to appear in two other courtrooms at the same time, I virtually always defer to your appearance in another court. As long as my staff knows that you’ve checked in and will appear after your other court obligations, there are usually no problems. Communication is key, preferably before your hearing time.
When is your motion call? Are there a maximum number of motions heard during motion call?
Criminal motions are heard Mondays at 11:00 a.m. (includes set aside hearings). I usually limit four hearings per hour, except I will take up to ten set aside hearings. Civil motions are heard Fridays at 9:00 a.m. via Zoom unless the attorney wants to appear in person. Those hearings are limited to five. Summary disposition motions are limited to one in addition to up to four other non-MSD motions.
Should proposed orders be submitted to the clerk before argument? Do you expect orders to be drafted in court, and, if so, are there computers for drafting them?
I prefer that orders be drafted and submitted prior to the hearing, but that is not necessary. Orders are welcome after hearings, not required that day.
How should stipulated orders be submitted?
Contact my JA and/or my law clerk first. Email is fine.
Who makes up your judicial staff and what roles do they play?
I have a JA, law clerk, and court reporter. My JA handles all administrative and scheduling matters, and my law clerk addresses all substantive legal and research matters.
What types of pretrial conferences do you hold and what happens at them?
Criminal pretrials are scheduled on Wednesdays at 9:00 a.m. usually when requested by counsel upon review and submission of a criminal pretrial conference summary, which is issued as part of my scheduling order. Defense attorneys and the trial counsel assistant prosecutor are required to hold a pretrial summary conference between the two of them, which should result in a plea agreement or pretrial/status conference/Cobbs hearing. I have an open discussion format in my chambers for pretrials. Civil pretrials and final settlement conferences are held on Thursdays at 9:00 and 10:00 a.m., respectively, over Zoom unless otherwise requested in person.
What types of matters/motions are held via Zoom and which are held in person?
Civil pretrials, settlement conferences, and all civil hearings default to Zoom hearings, but I will always accommodate in-person.
What are some components of an arguments (either in a brief or oral argument) that you find compelling or persuasive?
First, citing binding authority is always compelling. Too often, attorneys cite unpublished authority, which is not binding, though it can be helpful. What I find lacking in briefs and arguments is the application of the facts to the law—the actual analysis. Citing a case, then getting into the facts and arguing “it’s not fair” is neither compelling nor acceptable. Attorneys must describe the facts, set forth the law, and most importantly, argue why the law is favorable to their case. Incredibly, I find that lacking in a large percentage of cases and motions over which I preside. This is not only frustrating, but it wastes an enormous amount of time and resources. Poor advocacy, by way of citing improper authority and/or not conducting cogent analysis, often results in delay in processing decisions.
What procedural issues/disputes should be worked out between the parties before involving you?
All that are possible. One of the most unpleasant parts of my job is what I refer to as “babysitting” attorneys. When I practiced, I rarely brought to the court a dispute I had with opposing counsel. I did everything possible to work matters out while still advocating for my client, but also realizing that the judge probably did not want to hear or resolve our dispute. Of course, if, in good faith, counsel have met and conferred and made every reasonable attempt to resolve their dispute, then, of course, I will do my job and make decisions that are necessary. I will not hear any type of civil motion unless counsel has met and conferred beforehand (required in my scheduling order).
What are some common mistakes lawyers make in your courtroom, either while appearing in person or remotely?
Unfortunately, many attorneys are unprepared when they appear before the court. Mistakes are understandable, but lack of preparation is inexcusable. I understand the time constraints lawyers are under—I practiced for 23 years before taking the bench—but being unprepared is not acceptable at all. Lack of preparation not only undermines your responsibility to represent your client to the best of your ability, but it also sends a signal to the court that you don’t care about your client or your profession. I strongly advocate that if you are not prepared for a good reason, contact me or my court and explain why you are not prepared. Chances are good that I will understand and likely give allowance to your problem. But deliberate or inexcusable lack of preparedness is something I deeply loathe. As described above, lack of analysis in applying the law to the specific facts of a case is something I see all too often.
What do you think is the most commonly misinterpreted court rule or rule of evidence?
I am going to dodge the question and simply state that attorneys are woefully unacquainted with the Michigan Court Rules and, to a lesser extent, the Michigan Rules of Evidence. The vast majority of motions I receive do not cite the court rule under which the motion is being presented. This is shocking to me. Attorneys must read and understand the court rules and how they apply. So, I cannot cite one particular court rule or rule of evidence that is commonly misinterpreted; rather, attorneys need to study and review all the court rules and advise the court under which rule an argument is being presented.
What is an example of a time a lawyer impressed you?
Two come to mind. First, when a lawyer was having some difficulty personally, she came to me and explained what was going on and asked for some indulgence with deadlines, etc. She had already spoken to opposing counsel on these matters. I appreciated the candid, forthright manner in which she approached the situation, and I accommodated her request. Second, attorneys always impress me when they have thoroughly prepared for a motion and have spoken in depth to their client. When I asked many questions of this one particular attorney, he knew point-blank why I asked the question, and he had an intelligent, well-thought-out response.
What is something interesting you do off the bench?
I love music and listen to many different genres. I played the piano during my childhood and developed a true love for music. The geekiest thing I do? I have a postage stamp collection.
Is there anything else you would like Michigan lawyers to know?
Be prepared, work cooperatively with opposing counsel, know your client and his/her case better than he/she does, and please be respectful of the court.