Attorney Mike Morse has been labeled as a “co-conspirators” in alleged insurance fraud scheme by U.S. District Court judge Anthony Patti from the evidence presented in his courtroom. Federal prosecutor William G. Taylor, II, claimed from the evidence presented that Mr. Morse is indeed a “co-conspirator” in this alleged scheme, and that he is the only person who can be considered “interested in” the fraud that is occurring between him and his clients, such as State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company.
The federal prosecutor also claimed that Michael Morse’s role is to act as an expert witness to support his client and he is the only personal injury attorney who is willing to stand up in court and testify about the case. However, there are several issues with these claims. According to the complaint against Mr. Morse from the United States of America and his complaint from the state of Michigan, he does not have any involvement whatsoever with the alleged scheme and he has absolutely no involvement with the state’s claim that he is a “co-conspirator.”
What Michael Morse has done is to defend and fight for his client, as well as represent him, in a way that may be construed as assisting the state’s attorney in his scheme of fraud against his client. He has stated that he will be prepared to testify in this matter if called to testify and have filed a legal complaint against the state’s attorney. Further, he has not been contacted by the state to testify or file a complaint.
In addition to this, car accident attorneys have stated in their complaints and filings that Mr. Morse is not even represented by them. This may be the case because he has filed a lawsuit against them, but he is not representing them in any way and has not retained them to assist him in the defense of his case.
In addition, many car accident attorneys have claimed that they were never informed about the car accident case being filed against their client by the state’s attorney’s office until they were contacted in writing. They were not notified on his behalf, and nor were they notified by any other attorney, prior to the filing of the complaint by the state. If the state is really interested in pursuing this case, then it should not have taken over his case. If the case was filed by someone representing the state, then it should have been forwarded to the state to handle it, and would have had no bearing on his case at all.
Therefore, there is no question about the fact that the state is taking advantage of the attorney’s role in this matter. The claim by the state that Mr. Morse is the “only interested party” is not true and Mr. Morse is being portrayed in the media as a “co-conspirator” in this case.