Case law

Sheila L. Tanner v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary, Health, Education and Welfare

525 F.2d 51 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 31, 1975

The Secretary maintains that the Jimenez case is clearly not automatically dispositive of the instant case. … Rather the statute requires all claimants to establish the parenthood of the insured. Additional burdens are imposed strictly in instances of illegitimacy. Lucas v.

Dean Koch v. State of Ohio

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 2021

The district court found that whether or not Meyer was correct to decline to investigate Koch’s complaint, Meyer was entitled to qualified immunity since there is no clearly established right to an inspector general’s … Qualified immunity shields government officials acting within the scope of their official duties from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would

United States v. Gibbs

626 F.3d 344 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 24, 2010

This, we concluded in Ford, also established that a failure-to-report escape is not a “crime of violence.” 560 F. 3d at 423. … That error is also plain because Begay and Chambers clearly altered the analysis applicable to the question of whether a prior conviction constitutes a “crime of violence.”

Joseph E. Senk v. Village of Northfield

961 F.2d 1578 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 22, 1992

If the Senks' version of the facts is correct, however, the officers who are accused of using excessive force would clearly not be entitled to qualified immunity. … Summary judgment based on qualified immunity is therefore inappropriate.

Freddie Gregory v. Phillip Burnett

577 F. App'x 512 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 20, 2014

a constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established. … Ct. at 2093, the Supreme Court reversed the denial of qualified immunity on the basis that “at the time of [the plaintiff’s] arrest, it was not clearly established that an arrest supported by probable cause could violate

Whalen v. Randle

37 F. App'x 113 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 12, 2002

. § 2254 that was filed outside of the one-year statute of limitations established under § 2244(d)(1). Petitioner-Appellant, David M. … The improper advice Whalen received from the Ohio Public Defenders Office does not qualify him for equitable tolling under § 2244(d)(1).

King v. Emery

836 F.2d 1348 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 11, 1988

The correct test is objective in nature and inquires whether plaintiff's rights were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. See Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183 (1984); Harlow v. … It is true that plaintiff had an opportunity to rebut the qualified immunity issue when she filed her response to defendants' motion to dismiss.

Fairport International Exploration, Inc. v. the Shipwrecked Vessel

177 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 23, 1999

Burden of Proof 45 The district court in Fairport I required only that Michigan establish a colorable claim to the shipwreck. … The district courts rejected the admiralty standard only because they applied a burden of proof appropriate for assertions of sovereign immunity.

Coal Resources, Inc. v. Gulf & Western Industries, Inc.

954 F.2d 1263 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 29, 1992

We limit our discussion to issues still subject to disagreement which are not clearly waived by the defendants. A. … Thus, Barker could be considered qualified to choose the type of plant but this may not qualify him to give an expert opinion about the associated cost.

Parate v. Isibor

868 F.2d 821 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 16, 1989

immunity. … Isibor and Samuchin contend that because their actions implicated no clearly defined and settled principles of law, the defense of qualified immunity is applicable.

Bueno v. Mattner

829 F.2d 1380 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 30, 1987

It concluded that defendants did not qualify for the exemption because non-family members performed farm labor contracting activities for the farm. … Benavides performed farm labor contracting activities on their behalf is not clearly erroneous.

Salyer v. Consolidation Coal Co.

246 F. 794 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 1918

However, it is clearly established that an appointment which, under these sections is forbidden because premature, is not void but is only erroneous. The question first arose in Buckner’s Adm’rs v. … Railroad, supra, and clearly makes valid and effectual the beginning of this suit by Mrs.

LaFleur v. Cleveland Board of Education

465 F.2d 1184 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 27, 1972

“When a teacher qualifies to return from maternity leave, she shall have priority in reassignment to a vacancy for which she is qualified under her certificate, but she shall not have prior claim to the exact position she … The Supreme Court reminds us: “The establishment of prompt efficacious procedures to achieve legitimate state ends is a proper state interest worthy of cognizance in constitutional adjudication..

United States v. Wesley Roper

135 F.3d 430 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 1998

Apart from the foregoing reasons that immunized the government from the dictates of Rule 404(b) and its imposed limitation, the prosecution — at its first opportunity after becoming aware of the extent and substance of Roper … To so qualify, a defendant must be “substantially less culpable than the average participant.” United States v.

Grinter v. Knight

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 19, 2008

Belt available for questioning appear to allege that defendants failed to follow established procedures. Failing to follow proper procedures is insufficient to establish an infringement of a liberty interest. Olim v. … Furthermore, “[p]rison officials clearly have discretion under state law to deny a prisoner future good time.” Id. (citing Ky. Rev. Stat. § 197.045(1)).

Taylor v. Brighton Corp.

616 F.2d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 14, 1980

Brock, holding that individuals who are critical of government officials may constitute a clearly defined class for § 1985(3) purposes. … Thus, there was no conspiracy to deny equal protection or equal privileges and immunities.

Harris v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 2000

Miller, 910 F.2d A sentence of one or more years “PNC” thus qualifies under 1321, 1327 (6th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1094 § 4A1.1(c) as a term of probation of at least one year. See (1991). … Harris also argues that his attorney should have objected to the drug quantities used in establishing his base offense level under the guidelines.

Johnson v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

30 F.3d 45 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 18, 1994

Plaintiff has failed to submit any evidence besides her own subjective testimony that she was more qualified for the job *48 than the selectee. … A district court’s determination that statistical evidence is insufficient is subject to a clearly erroneous standard of review. Scales, 925 F.2d at 907 .

Parate v. Isibor

868 F.2d 821 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 17, 1989

immunity. … Isibor and Samuchin contend that because their actions implicated no clearly defined and settled principles of law, the defense of qualified immunity is applicable.

United States v. John Burton Moody

371 F.2d 688 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 27, 1967

It was clearly established, however, that the defendant received the fees and made all bank deposits and simply told the bookkeeper of the amount to enter. Defendant did not testify. … But, equally obviously, it does not create any immunity from them either.