The 2012 edition of Michael’s book, Anderson’s Ohio Civil Practice with Forms (LexisNexis) (with John W. McCormac), is now in print.

Michael was a signatory to an amicus curiae brief of civil procedure professors filed in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., no. 10-1491.  The case involves the civil liability of corporations under the federal Alien Tort Statute. It will be argued and decided in the Court’s 2011-2012 Term.

Several of Michael’s articles were cited.

• Supreme Court Monitoring of the United States Court of Appeals En Banc, 9 Sup. Ct. Econ. Rev. 171 (2001) (with Tracey George), in Pauline T. Kim, Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law and the Judicial Hierarchy, 105 Nw. U. L. Rev. 535 (2011);
• Ideology and En Banc Review, 67 N.C. L. Rev. 29 (1988), in Pauline T. Kim, Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law and the Judicial Hierarchy, 105 Nw. U. L. Rev. 535 (2011);
• The Future of Parity, 46 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1457 (2005), in Pauline T. Kim, Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law and the Judicial Hierarchy, 105 Nw. U. L. Rev. 535 (2011); and in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012);
• Revitalizing Interlocutory Appeals in the Federal Courts, 58 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1165 (1990), in Kevin M. Clermont, Principles of Civil Procedure (West, 3d ed. 2012);
• An Economic and Empirical Analysis of Choice of Law, 24 Ga. L. Rev. 49 (1989), in Richard A. Posner, Economic Analysis of Law (Aspen, 8th ed. 2011);
• Shoring Up Article III: Legislative Court Doctrine in the Post-CFTC v. Schor Era, 68 B.U. L. Rev. 85 (1988) (with Richard Saphire), in Marcia L. McCormick, Federal Regulation and the Problem of Adjudication, 56 St. Louis U. L.J. 39 (2011); and in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012);
• Supreme Court Monitoring of State Courts in the Twenty-first Century, 35 Ind. L. Rev. 335 (2002), in Jack L. Landau, Some Thoughts About State Constitutional Interpretation, 115 Penn. St. L. Rev. 837 (2011);
• Institutional Process, Agenda Setting, and the Development of Election Law on the Supreme Court, 68 Ohio St. L.J. 767 (2007), in Richard L. Hasen, The Supreme Court’s Shrinking Election Law Docket, 2001-2010: A Legacy of Bush v. Gore or Fear of the Roberts Court?, 10 Election L.J. 325 (2011);
• Constitutional Litigation in Federal and State Courts: An Empirical Analysis of Judicial Parity, 10 Hastings Const. L. Q. 213 (1983) (with James Walker), in in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012);
• Rethinking Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction, 52 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 383 (1991), in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012);
• Congress, Ex parte Young, and the Fate of the Three-Judge District Court, 70 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 101 (2008), in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012); and
• State Court Protection of Federal Constitutional Rights, 12 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol’y 127 (1989) (with James Walker), in Martin H. Redish, Suzanna Sherry & James E. Pfander, Federal Courts (West, 7th ed. 2012); and
• The Three-Judge District Court in Voting Rights Litigation, 30 U. Mich. J. L. Reform 79 (1996), in Richard L. Hasen, The Supreme Court’s Shrinking Election Law Docket, 2001-2010: A Legacy of Bush v. Gore or Fear of the Roberts Court?  10 Election L.J. 325 (2011).