Nicole Gettler is an accomplished attorney with more than 12 years of civil litigation practice. Her legal experience includes first- and third-party automobile defense, Michigan Automobile Insurance Placement Facility (MAIPF) coverage, medical malpractice defense, slip-and-fall defense, fraud claims, property insurance law, coverage analyses, real property disputes, contract disputes, quiet title actions and probate disputes, among others.

Nicole has volunteered with Lakeshore Legal Aid, and is an avid supporter of Humble Design.

    Education

    • Thomas M. Cooley Law School (J.D., magna cum laude, 2012)
    • State University of New York at Buffalo (B.A. English and Psychology, magna cum laude, 2007)

    Bar Admissions

    • New York
    • Michigan

    Court Admissions

    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan
    • U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan

    Professional Affiliations

    • Women's Lawyers Association of Michigan
    • Women's Bar Association Oakland Region; President, 2023–2024

    Awards & Honors

    • Selected for inclusion in Best Lawyers® Ones to Watch™, 2022–2024
    • Michigan Super Lawyers® Rising Stars™, 2019–2022
    • Michigan Lawyers Weekly Up & Coming Lawyers, 2022

Nicole L. Gettler

Mock, Beres, and Gettler Shut Down Agency Claims for Franchisor Client with Summary Disposition Victory

Valerie Mock (Partner-Detroit), Katherine Beres (Of Counsel-Detroit), and Nicole Gettler (Of Counsel-Detroit) prevailed on a motion for summary disposition in the Oakland County Circuit Court in Pontiac, Michigan, for a national hair removal franchisor client. The plaintiff allegedly sustained injury to her genitals during an improperly performed waxing procedure conducted by an employee at the hair removal franchisee location. The plaintiff sued the franchisee and its employee for negligence and sued our client franchisor for vicarious liability based on actual or apparent agency. Valerie, Katherine, and Nicole filed a dispositive motion clarifying that no actual agency relationship existed between the franchisor and the franchisee because our client did not exercise control over the franchisee’s operations. The Detroit team also demonstrated that apparent agency was likewise not viable, as the plaintiff could not show reasonable reliance on her subjective belief that the franchisee acted as the franchisor’s agent. The court agreed and granted summary disposition in favor of Wilson Elser’s franchisor client.

Valerie Henning Mock, Katherine M. Beres and Nicole L. Gettler