Holland Restaurateur Who Defied COVID Orders Loses Again In Court

(Source: MIRS.news, Published 10/07/2025) A state appeals panel affirmed Monday that a Holland restaurateur correctly owed the Department of Agriculture Rural Development the court-ordered $7,500 fine imposed for defying COVID orders.

The Michigan Court of Appeals panel held in its opinion that the lower court “followed our remand instructions” and Marlena Bistro & Pizzeria’s owner Marlena Pavlos-Hackney had not shown an error was made.

The panel held that Pavlos-Hackney’s continued attempts to litigate the merits of the contempt orders were outside the trial and appeals courts’ proceedings. The panel rejected her argument that MDARD suffered no injury because the department is represented by the Attorney General’s office – whose staff are paid by taxpayers.

“There was evidence that Pavlos-Hackney’s contemptuous misconduct caused MDARD to suffer an actual loss, thereby requiring the circuit court to order (Pavlos-Hackney) to reimburse MDARD for those losses pursuant to MCL 600.1721,” according to the opinion from Judges Randy J. Wallace, Michael J. Riordan and James Robert Redford.

The opinion notes the $7,500 has already been paid.

The panel’s opinion does not, however, address a suggestion that the state engaged in politically-based enforcement of pandemic orders – a suggestion Pavlos-Hackney claims was evident when Gov. Gretchen Whitmer was photographed at a restaurant, essentially violating her own regulations in May 2021.

Pavlos-Hackney repeatedly ignored public health orders, staying open despite a ban on dine-in services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MDARD suspended Pavlos-Hackney’s food license, which was upheld at an administrative hearing. The department filed a lawsuit seeking to shutter Marlena’s Bistro.

The courts sided with MDARD, but Pavlos-Hackney continued to defy the court orders, which resulted in her being held in contempt. She was given two fines totaling $15,000, which were eventually reduced to $7,500, and the case returned to the trial court to determine if MDARD was entitled to compensation for Pavlos-Hackney’s contempt (See “Marlena’s Owner Still Facing Contempt, But Fines Are Halves,” 10/21/22).

MDARD then submitted a bill for $9,795, which included attorney fees as well as costs for MDARD and the Michigan State Police, and Pavlos-Hackney unsuccessfully asked the trial court to reconsider that ruling.