Case law

Safeco Insurance Company of America and Eatherly Construction Company, Plaintiffs-Appellants/cross-Appellees v. City of White House, Tennessee, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Intervenor-Appellee

191 F.3d 675 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 20, 1999

[O]n the issue of breach, there is clearly a genuine issue of material fact concerning Eatherly's good faith." Ibid. … In the somewhat-related field of qualified immunity, even in circuits where judges rule on the reasonableness of state actors, juries still decide issues of material fact. See, e.g., Sharrar v.

Davis v. Straub

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 2005

However, this fact had already been clearly established and admitted by the witness in a properly Mirandized statement to police. … In any event, AEDPA calls for us to interpret clearly established federal law, “as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” not the United States Courts of Appeals.

Crystal Thomas v. Aaron Bauman

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 3, 2020

Farr was not entitled to qualified immunity for the detention of Thomas without suspicion of wrongdoing. … In doing so, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction because the officers do not “raise[] the purely legal question of whether the facts alleged . . . support a claim of violation of clearly established law.”

Peter Hudson v. City of Highland Park

943 F.3d 792 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 22, 2019

In qualified immunity cases like this one, we also ask whether the claimant (1) established a constitutional violation (2) that was clearly established. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 227 (2009). … We have repeatedly held—we have repeatedly clearly established—that employers may not retaliate against employees based on their protected speech. Buddenberg v. Weisdack, 939 F.3d 732, 741 (6th Cir. 2019); Chappel v.

Joe R. Hainline v. General Motors Corporation, a Delaware Corporation

444 F.2d 1250 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 30, 1971

Each of these provisions is qualified by the following language: “unless otherwise determined in connection with the termination of his employment.” … In the instant case, however, the issue is whether the Committee may deny the express right to receive payments with complete immunity from judicial scrutiny.

Chilingirian v. Boris

882 F.2d 200 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 5, 1989

Our affirmance of the district court’s summary judgment ruling is not grounded on the city’s affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Accordingly, we need not consider the application of the city’s defense of qualified immunity or whether that defense precluded discovery prior to the district court’s summary judgment ruling.

Crowe v. United States

200 F.2d 526 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 19, 1952

“It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk deliver a certified copy of this judgment and commitment to the United States Marshal or other qualified officer and that the same shall serve as the commitment herein.” … ends of justice and the best interest of the public as well as the defendant will be subserved by suspending the execution of sentence and by placing the defendant on probation under the provisions of the Act of Congress establishing

Steven Staub v. Tracy Nietzel

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 2023

The defense of qualified immunity “protects government officials performing discretionary functions unless their conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person in the … A plaintiff seeking to overcome qualified immunity must show that (1) “a constitutional violation has occurred” and (2) the “violation involved a clearly established constitutional right of which a reasonable person would

The Detroit Edison Company v. East China Township School District No. 3

378 F.2d 225 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 1967

Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 554 , 84 S.Ct. 1362, 1378 , 12 L.Ed. 2d 506 (1954), for example, recognized that "all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote" (referring of course to the right to vote for a " … Clearly, many of the sections included in the reference to §§ 1971-1995 inclusive of 42 U.S. C.A. are inapplicable in this case.

City of Cookeville v. Upper Cumberland Electric Membership Corp.

484 F.3d 380 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 19, 2007

In the context of federal officer removal, the Supreme Court has held that the officer “must both raise a colorable federal defense and establish that the suit is ‘for a[n] act under color of office.’” … First, the district court did not clearly err by rejecting Cookeville’s proposed reintegration plan.

EJS Properties, LLC v. City of Toledo

698 F.3d 845 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 5, 2012

After finding no underlying constitutional violations, the district court declined to address the defendants’ arguments relating to qualified or municipal immunity. Id. at 22. … We have, however, held more generally that seeking redress from a government official qualifies as petitioning, and a zoning request certainly qualifies under this standard. Id. at 520; see also White v.

Parker-Hannifin Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

139 F.3d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 23, 1998

The qualified cost is equal to the sum of the fund’s “qualified direct cost” for such year, and, subject to the limitation of § 419A(b), any addition to a “qualified asset account” (QAA) for the year. Id. § 419(c)(1). … In any event, we note that Parker’s "Tax Matters” document for the month of June 1987 clearly indicates that Parker did not establish a reserve for the payment of post-retirement benefits.

United States v. Master

614 F.3d 236 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 2010

Johnson, 308 F.3d 594, 611 (6th Cir. 2002) (noting that it is “well-established law in this circuit that unpublished cases are not binding precedent”). … Clearly, more is required under the Fourth Amendment for an individual to be qualified and thus authorized to serve as a magistrate, and the requisite qualifications are determined by state law.

Jerome Dewald v. Gene Wriggelsworth

748 F.3d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 7, 2014

Clearly established federal law “Under AEDPA, if there is no clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court that sup *299 ports a habeas petitioner’s legal argument, the argument must fail.” … We therefore find no clearly established federal law in this case.

Gerald Ostipow v. William Federspiel

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 29, 2023

To overcome Federspiel’s assertion of qualified immunity, the purported constitutional rule violated by the sheriff needed to be clearly established in our circuit at the time of the violation. … So even without his preclusion and forfeiture problems, Ostipow could not satisfy the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test. B.

Julea Ward v. Vernon Polite

667 F.3d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 27, 2012

The university defendants cross-appeal the district court’s decision denying them qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from monetary damages, not from injunctive relief, see Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982); Wood v.

United States v. James M. Laster (99-6244) and Jerry Lear (99-6247)

258 F.3d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 2001

when a qualified sponsoring witness testifies to the trustworthiness of the records in question. … It should certainly not do so in the present case, in which an established hearsay exception clearly applied but rendered the documents inadmissible. . See also 3 Stephen A. Saltzburg, Michael M. Martin, & Daniel J.

Paul Wallace v. Robert Mamula and City of Steubenville

30 F.3d 135 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 1994

"Government officials performing discretionary functions are afforded qualified immunity, shielding them from civil damages, as long as their conduct 'does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … The court found that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established right since Johnson was arrested for his act of refusing to admit the officers, not for his speech

Communities for Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Association

459 F.3d 676 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 16, 2006

Such an intent, according to the Court, was found in the comprehensive procedures and guarantees established in the EHA. Id. … The district court therefore determined that MHSAA qualifies as providing a “public service” under Michigan law.

Lee v. Hefner

136 F. App'x 807 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 7, 2005

immunity. … Even if a constitutional violation had occurred, Hefner was entitled to qualified immunity. The qualified immunity analysis is well-established.