Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.42s
Yusef Phillips v. Andrew Hinds
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 13, 2022
Even so, Hinds claims that he is entitled to qualified immunity under Phillips’s telling of the story. Specifically, he argues that it was not clearly established that shooting Phillips violated the Fourth Amendment. … A jury may ultimately grant Hinds qualified immunity. But under the facts as Phillips presents them, we may not.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished608 F.2d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 12, 1979
Further, these witnesses testified, and this Court accepts as fact, that the candidates, positioned on the register were not, as defendants claimed, equally qualified or a “pool” of qualified candidates. 26 446 F.Supp. at … The district court’s findings of fact are binding on this court unless they are clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a).
Cited 163 timesPublished928 F.2d 188 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 1991
However, even a strong belief in one's own case is insufficient to overcome the well-established bar to actions filed outside the limitations period. … It is well settled that "Congress [did not] intend[ ] by the general language of Sec. 1983 to override the traditional sovereign immunity of the States." Quern v.
Cited 40 timesPublished379 F.2d 321 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 16, 1967
Clearly the State of Tennessee is not liable as a “person” within the meaning of this section (See e. g., United States ex rel. Lee v. … Johnson City, 206 Tenn. 411 , 333 S.W.2d 924 , and was considered established in City of Knoxville v. State ex rel. Graves, 207 Tenn. 558 , 341 S.W.2d 718 .
Cited 78 timesPublishedLinda McCormick v. Eric A. Braverman Citizens Insurance Company of America
451 F.3d 382 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 20, 2006
In 1994, in Case No. 94-403973, Plaintiff filed a quiet title action against Edward’s estate to establish her ownership interest in the Henry Ruff Property. … Both forms of absolute immunity are subject to certain exceptions.
Cited 377 timesPublishedLucile BARNETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Defendant-Appellee
153 F.3d 338 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 28, 1998
Having considered the record developed below, we find that the district court did not clearly err in its findings and therefore affirm. I. … It is a finding of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review.”). *341 In order to prevail under Title VII, Barnett must first establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination, which requires that she prove
Cited 80 timesPublishedChristanna Bullock v. City of Detroit, Mich.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 14, 2020
Bullock seeks to overcome this qualified-immunity defense with what she says is a clearly established legal rule: “a single controlled buy at a particular location by itself does not establish probable cause to search the … In this appeal, the parties do not dispute (and so we may assume) that these rules qualify as sufficiently specific clearly established law for qualified-immunity purposes. Cf. Rich- ards v. City of Jackson, 788 F.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished342 F.3d 517 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 4, 2003
In addition, the cost to an out-of-state winery of the license that enables it to sell to a Michigan wholesaler is $300, while a comparable Michigan winery must pay only a $25 license fee to qualify to ship wine directly … Roberts, 199 F.Supp.2d 397, 408 (E.D.Va.2002) (finding Bridenbaugh "improperly decided because it does not rely on the established dormant Commerce Clause analysis"); Dickerson v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedS. Jones v. City of Detroit, Mich.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 14, 2020
Qualified immunity precludes liability for police officers except when they commit (1) a violation of the law (2) that is clearly established. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009). … Because the officers did not violate any clearly established law, qualified immunity applies. We reverse. 9 Case No. 19-2346, Jones v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished112 F.3d 831 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 6, 1997
to establish intentional discrimination. … A prima facie case of discrimination can be established by showing: (1) plaintiff was a member of a protected class; (2) plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action; (3) plaintiff was qualified for the position; (4) plaintiff
Cited 39 timesPublishedUnited States v. George Y. Stribling
437 F.2d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 10, 1971
It is well established that agents of the Internal Revenue Service may not use fraud, trickery or deceit to obtain consent to examine documents or conduct a search. … An agent of a field office of the Internal Revenue Service must be held answerable for information which his immediate superiors- should have discovered and which his district and regional offices clearly possessed.
Cited 23 timesPublishedSharon R. Pfennig v. Household Credit Services, Inc. And Mbna America Bank, N.A.
286 F.3d 340 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 11, 2002
Defendants originally established Plaintiffs credit limit at $2,000, and subsequently allowed her to increase that limit when she attempted to make a purchase. … Thus, Defendants assert that they are entitled to immunity under 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (f).
Cited 17 timesPublished643 F. App'x 524 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 8, 2016
Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err by applying the enhancement at Guidelines § 2D1.1(b)(1). … A defendant qualifies for a leadership enhancement if the government establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, “that he has exercised decisionmaking authority, recruited accomplices, received a larger share of the
Cited 1 timesPublishedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 5, 2006
The district court held that Hughes is protected by qualified immunity. Respondeat superior is not a proper basis for liability under § 1983. Leary v. Daeschner, 349 F.3d 888, 903 (6th Cir. 2003); Bellamy v. … immunity.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedKelly Blanchet v. Charter Comm'ns, LLC
27 F.4th 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 8, 2022
Failure to Accommodate Under the direct evidence test, Blanchet bears the initial burden of establishing that (1) she is disabled, (2) she is “‘otherwise qualified’ for the position despite his or her disability.” … Blanchet cannot establish that she is “otherwise qualified” for her position without an accommodation or with an essential function removed, and she does not argue otherwise.
Cited 65 timesPublishedLongstreth v. Franklin County Children Services
14 F.3d 601 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 1993
14 F.3d 601 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished … However, unless a state expressly waives its sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, the state and its agencies are immune from an action for damages and injunctive relief in federal court. See, e.g., Welch v.
Cited 1 timesPublished119 F.3d 415 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 15, 1997
Section 1144(b)(7) provides that 23 Subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to qualified domestic relations orders (within the meaning of section 1056(d)(3)(B)(i) of this title), qualified medical child support orders … dependent of a participant, and 33 (II) is made pursuant to a State domestic relations law (including a community property law). 34 (C) A domestic relations order meets the requirements of this subparagraph only if such order clearly
Cited 103 timesPublishedJones Ex Rel. Estate of Jones v. Reynolds
438 F.3d 685 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 27, 2006
To overcome the officers’ qualified immunity from this individual-liability action, Jones must make two showings: that the officers violated the decedent’s constitutional rights and that those rights were “clearly established … The Court has told lower courts that they “must” address the “initial inquiry” before reaching the “clearly established” question. Id. A.
Cited 2 timesPublishedCharlie Lilly v. City of Erlanger
598 F. App'x 370 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 2015
officers’ position, would not know he was violating Plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights.” … that constitutional right was clearly established such that a ‘reasonable official would -13- No. 14-5069 Lilly v.
Cited 2 timesUnpublishedAnthony Flemister v. City of Detroit
358 F. App'x 616 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 18, 2009
Ameritech, 129 F.3d 857, 863 (6th Cir.1997). 3 A. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Defendants argued that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The two-part test for qualified immunity asks: (1) whether the facts that a plaintiff has alleged or shown make out a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) if so, whether the right at issue was clearly established
Cited 5 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna