Case law

Leo J. Brown v. Marshall County, Kentucky

394 F.2d 498 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 2, 1968

Among the acts upon which Brown relies to establish nuisance are the following: drinking parties, screaming, bottle smashing, refusal to collect refuse, failure to provide restroom facilities resulting in specified foul and … This rule has been qualified by Kentucky courts, however, in an apparent attempt to ameliorate its harshness.

Vern Guindon v. Township of Dundee, Michigan

488 F. App'x 27 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 2012

At a minimum, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as to this claim. 2. … Qualified Immunity Public officials who perform discretionary duties within the scope of their employment are “shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Thomson v. Harmony

65 F.3d 1314 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 18, 1995

However, the district court permitted Thomson’s § 1983 claims for prospective injunctive relief against the state to proceed, finding that his allegations fit within the exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity established … The Leaman court found that the word “any” was unambiguous, and “the Ohio legislature clearly provided for waiver of federal causes of action.” 825 F.2d at 952 .

Bradley v. City of Ferndale

148 F. App'x 499 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 2005

A government official performing discretionary functions is entitled to qualified immunity in his individual capacity if his conduct does not violate constitutional standards in light of clearly established law at the time … In Saucier, the Supreme Court established a two-part test for determining whether qualified immunity applies. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 .

Dwayne Lacey v. City of Warren

571 F. App'x 400 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 3, 2014

It is clearly established that an investigatory detention may not be unreasonably extended in duration beyond the purpose of the No. 13-4244 Lacey v. City of Warren stop. … Based on these facts, Yuricek violated clearly established law.

James M. Pecsi v. Thomas C. Doyle, Detective City of Eastlake, John Does, Unknown Eastlake Police Officers.

940 F.2d 661 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 1991

The district court also found that Doyle was entitled to qualified immunity because his actions were objectively reasonable under clearly established law, relying on Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (1981). … Police officers are ordinarily entitled to qualified immunity if "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v.

Walter Wiley v. Consolidation Coal Company, Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Parties-In-Interest

915 F.2d 1076 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 10, 1990

The Court held that § 727.203(a) requires that a claimant establish at least one of the qualifying facts by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. at 156-60, 108 S.Ct. at 438-41 . … Section 727.203 clearly sets forth a two-step inquiry.

Prater v. Hite Preparation Co.

829 F.2d 1363 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 22, 1987

The court did not declare that the first, qualifying study (later contradicted by other non-qualifying studies) actually established the presumption; rather, that evidence together with qualifying x-ray evidence established … We hold that this decision is supported by substantial evidence because there were two non-qualifying blood gas studies in the record, and the qualifying study was preceded only days before by a study producing clearly non-qualifying

Mark Lombardo, Jr. v. Kevin Ernst

597 F. App'x 813 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 2014

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … This Court applies a two-step qualified-immunity inquiry, asking “(1) whether the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) if so, whether that constitutional right was clearly established such that a ‘reasonable

Sarah v. Thompson

109 F. App'x 770 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 15, 2004

Despite Sarah’s failure to demonstrate that he had exhausted his available administrative remedies, a magistrate judge issued a report recommending that summary judgment be granted to Thompson because she was entitled to qualified … immunity.

Kline v. Tennessee Valley Authority

128 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 1997

It is a finding of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review. … Thus, the district court’s conclusion that Kline failed to establish pretext is clearly erroneous. *352 As the Supreme Court’s opinion in Hicks indicates, a factfinder is ■ permitted. to infer discrimination upon a determination

United States v. Baker

559 F.3d 443 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 16, 2009

This error is “plain” — that is, “clear” or “obvious”— because Begay clearly altered the requirements for an offense to qualify as a predicate felony under the “otherwise” clause of § 4B1.2(a). See Johnson v. … The government argues that if defendant had objected to the conclusion that reckless endangerment constituted a predicate felony, it could have presented additional evidence establishing that the conviction did qualify as

United States of America, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Movant-Appellant v. City of Detroit

329 F.3d 515 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 15, 2003

Sovereign Immunity Defense The Corps claims that its sovereign immunity precludes this action. Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the United States is immune from suit unless it consents to be sued. … In point of fact, the Supreme Court proceeded to elaborate on the subject by clearly stating that “[t]here may be exceptional circumstances in which a district court can show clearly the inadequacy” of the statute that specifically

Ontha v. Rutherford Cnty TN

222 F. App'x 498 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 13, 2007

for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … This qualified immunity inquiry entails two steps.

Joseph Johnson v. Clair Sootsman

79 F.4th 608 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 16, 2023

II Sootsman has raised a qualified-immunity defense to Johnson’s Eighth Amendment claim. … clearly established law.

Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Kfc National Management Company, D/B/A Kentucky Fried Chicken

682 F.2d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 12, 1982

, and of the Secretary’s interpretation thereof, 29 C.F.R. 779.387, under which establishments without on-premises dining facilities could not reasonably qualify as “restaurants.” … Congress clearly intended to distinguish among food service establishments and to strictly limit the partial exemption.

Myslakowski v. United States

806 F.2d 94 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 26, 1986

The district court found that the departmental decision to dispose of the jeep was a “policy-based discretionary” decision: “[T]he Government’s decision to sell the jeeps to the public was clearly a policy based discretionary … thought to the need for warnings even in view of the Cornell Report, is not to say that the considerations unaddressed are therefore outside the ambit of the discretionary judgment exception to the statute and a basis for establishing

Trent Young v. Kent Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 10, 2022

“Clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity “means there must either be ‘controlling authority or a robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority.’” Guertin v. … How can Guy “clearly establish” anything for officers if it does not clearly establish anything for us? Rivas-Villegas, 142 S. Ct. at 8 (quoting Brosseau v. Haugen, 543 U.S. 194, 199 (2004) (per curiam)).

Cleve Canham v. Oberlin College

666 F.2d 1057 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 1981

The court also found that appellant’s journalism experience may have rendered him over qualified, rather than qualified, for the job, and that the other candidates possessed an important qualification, familiarity with the … The appellant has failed to persuade us that the findings of fact of the district court are clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a).

Dixie Webb v. Kentucky State University

468 F. App'x 515 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 14, 2012

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Although Defendants’ generic assertion of qualified immunity would have been enough to assert the defense as to the First Amendment retaliation claim, before the district court, Defendants only argued qualified immunity