Notable Achievements

Dr. Lugosi’s notability is not based on his status as a ‘lawyer’ but as a legal catalyst. His career is defined by a rare ‘double impact’ on North American law.

In Canada, his successful appeal in the landmark Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Feeney fundamentally altered the balance between state power and individual privacy. resulting in the codified ‘Feeney Warrant.’ The Supreme Court of Canada ruled 5–4 that police could not enter a private dwelling to make an arrest without prior judicial authorization. This decision led to Parliament’s amendment of the Criminal Code of Canada, establishing what is now known in Canadian law as a “Feeney Warrant.”

The Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear what would have been another landmark case, R. v. Mary Wagner. Dr. Lugosi was denied the opportunity to argue that unborn children were human beings and were entitled to equal protection under s. 15 of the Charter of Rights. This inexplicable refusal was not consistent with the law, which requires that issues of national importance be resolved by the Supreme Court.

In the United States, Dr. Lugosi’s scholarly work as a law professor pioneered the intellectual cornerstone for the winning arguments in the Supreme Court of the United States that eventually led to the rare reversal of an established case, Roe v. Wade. In the 2022 decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Dr. Lugosi’s dissertation, Conforming to the Rule of Law, argued that constitutional law must recognize “human being” and “person” as identical legal categories to satisfy the rule of law. His thesis—which advocated for the overruling of Roe v. Wade on the grounds of equal protection and originalist interpretation–was cited by legal organizations (such as the Life Legal Defense Foundation) in amicus briefs in that case to the Supreme Court of the United States. While the Supreme Court of the United States did overrule Roe v. Wade, the Court did not go further to consider Dr. Lugosi’s second argument that unborn children were human beings and were therefore entitled to national protection from murder by abortion under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

In addition, Dr. Lugosi, as an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan and Washington, and in the U.S. Supreme Court, authored three winning amicus curiae briefs for The Rutherford Institute: K. Millbrook v. USA; Florida v. Jardine (2013) and Florida v. Harris (2013). His representation of Julie Baumer and his counsel work exposed major medical errors in the case of People v. Julie Baumer, resulted in a new trial and the freeing of a factually innocent woman who was wrongfully convicted of First-Degree Child Abuse in the State of Michigan.

As a dual citizen of both nations, and as a legal architect, Dr. Lugosi has consistently navigated the intersection of constitutional originalism, bioethics, and criminal defense as a catalyst for major changes in the law and for justice, leaving dual unique historical footprints in the highest courts of both Canada and the United States.

His skill as a trial lawyer has been recognized. In his instructions to the jury in a first-degree murder trial involving co-defendants with cut-throat defenses, B.C. Supreme Court Tim Singh made the following comment that resulted in an application for a mistrial and ultimately was the reason a new trial was ordered by the Court of Appeal: “Members of the jury, he [Copeland] was then cross-examined by Mr. Lugosi. I am sure you will vividly recall that examination. It was one of the most forceful, effective, brilliant pieces of work where he attacked Copeland’s credibility … [counsel submission for mistrial] … There is no question that anybody perceiving what it is that your Lordship says is going to take from that that your Lordship’s impression was that he [Copeland] was essentially destroyed on cross-examination. The Court: I still hold that view.” R. v. Copeland, (1999) 141 C.C.C. (3d) 559 (B.C.C.A.) at 567-568.