Case law

Demyanovich v. Cadon Plating & Coatings, L.L.C.

747 F.3d 419 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 28, 2014

We find evidence in the record to establish a genuine factual dispute as to whether Demyanovich was permanently incapable of working at the time that he was terminated. … Regardless, in his deposition testimony, Ensign clearly stated that he told Demyanovich on February 23 that he was terminated. R. 38-6 (Ensign Dep. at 85) (Page ID #962).

Benjamin W. BROWNLOW, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDGECOMB METALS COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant

867 F.2d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 13, 1989

Because we conclude the district court’s central findings of fact are clearly erroneous, we reverse. *961 I. A. … Therefore, in order to prevail on appeal, defendant must establish that the district court’s finding was “clearly erroneous.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a); Anderson v.

Vincent v. Brewer Company

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 19, 2007

The district court held that Vincent could not establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination because she could not show that she was as qualified for her position as her male replacement. … This quoted language does not clearly refer to the prima facie case, and even if it did so, the language was not necessary to the actual holdings in Suggs.

Jason Babb, a Minor, Through His Parents and Next Friends, Joe and Sharon Babb v. Knox County School System

965 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 29, 1992

The hearing officer made very few findings of fact and concluded that the Babbs had *106 the burden of establishing the amount of reimbursement for educational expenses. … The Babbs argue that (1) the district court erred by not determining that Jason was clearly emotionally handicapped and qualified for special services under the Act, (2) the Babbs complied with the administrative exhaustion

Diana Vistein v. The American Registry of Radiologist Tech

342 F. App'x 113 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 13, 2009

Vistein contends as an initial matter that the ARRT Ethics Committee does not qualify as a health care entity under O.R.C. § 2305.25. … The Supreme Court has established four tests for determining whether the challenged conduct may be fairly attributable to the State for purposes of a § 1983 claim.

Jason Humphrey v. Kim Sapp

462 F. App'x 528 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 8, 2012

Sapp has also presented the alternative defense of qualified immunity. … Like absolute immunity, qualified immunity is a bar to suit and should be resolved at the “earliest possible 7 In Kalina, the deputy prosecuting attorney signed a “Certification for Determination of Probable

Trihealth, Inc. v. Board of Commissioners, Hamilton County, Ohio

430 F.3d 783 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 14, 2005

Hence, the presumption of rationality is not so clearly overcome in this case as in Bower. … TriHealth simply has not established the existence of a constitutionally protected property interest.

Zielasko v. Ohio

873 F.2d 957 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 3, 1989

The district court also found that Ohio was not entitled to dismissal based on eleventh amendment immunity. … Whether or not these reasons were actually considered in establishing section 6(C) is irrelevant. See Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603, 612 , 80 S.Ct. 1367, 1373 , 4 L.Ed.2d 1435 (1960).

Case v. United States

633 F.2d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 30, 1980

The Standard of Judicial Review The government contends that we need not confine ourselves to a “clearly erroneous” standard of review in this case. … It is, therefore, an ordinary issue of fact, subject to reversal on appeal only if we believe the District Court’s findings were “clearly erroneous.” *1245 V.

United States v. Bonnie Sue Anders, (89-5465) and Trumanda Weddle, (89-5467)

899 F.2d 570 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 19, 1990

Therefore, Tester’s statements concerning the amount of cocaine that was involved were not immune from use against Anders. … We accept the district court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (d).

Kim Ensley-Gaines v. Marvin Runyon, Postmaster

100 F.3d 1220 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 20, 1996

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, the Plaintiff may prove her claim either through direct evidence, statistical proof, or the test established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas. … On appeal, this Court reversed and held the district court’s finding of sex discrimination was not supported by substantial evidence and was clearly erroneous.

Gleason v. Fahey

915 F.2d 1571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 2, 1990

915 F.2d 1571 Unpublished Disposition 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 … A qualified immunity defense is available to federal officials "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

Clarence Sanford v. Lisa Stewart

597 F. App'x 321 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 20, 2015

Jurisdiction Over Denial of Qualified Immunity We review a district court’s denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity grounds de novo. Quigley v. … This case does not fall within the narrow category of cases open to interlocutory appeal based on qualified immunity.

Gerald Krafsur v. Michael Davenport

736 F.3d 1032 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 4, 2013

In the same way, the government’s needs as employer do not suspend the requirement that Congress speak clearly before foreclosing all judicial review of constitutional challenges. See Doe, 486 U.S. at 603. … Scanlon, 473 U.S. 234 (1985) (involving elimination of a State’s immunity from suit), Doe does not establish an express-statement requirement. An early decision in the Doe sequence, Johnson v. Robison, proves the point.

Sanket Hasmukhbai Patel v. Ur Jaddou

92 F.4th 639 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 9, 2024

Patel’s assault, disclosed their personal identifying information, and explained why they qualified for the visas. … Lambert, 544 F.3d 644, 647–48 (6th Cir. 2008) (noting that our circuit and five others have declined to find negligence sufficient to establish a “willful” violation of a statute); Calderone v.

Arch on the Green, Inc. v. Lawrence Groves

761 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 31, 2014

Legal pneumoconiosis is established partly by the qualifying pulmonary lung function tests that Drs. … Rather, the ALJ very clearly stated that “I find that Claimant has established by a preponderance of the evidence that his total disability was due in part to his pneumoconiosis.”

United States v. Ronald Morelli

643 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 27, 1981

Typically, Morelli does not appear to have actually participated in the games at Luca’s residence, although his role as control man and banker was clearly established. … TO ESTABLISH A PATTERN UNDER TITLE 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (5).

Fannie Ball (02-6289) Stephen Heiser (02-6311) v. Union Carbide Corp.

385 F.3d 713 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 30, 2004

In that event, a plaintiff must clearly plead that the injury occurred within the statute of limitations period. Plaintiffs here face a formidable statute of limitations hurdle. … Norton are sued in their official capacity as officers of a governmental agency, they are immune from suit, and that sovereign immunity has not been waived for any claim against them. Id. at 12-13.

United States v. Anthony Palos

978 F.3d 373 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2020

Because the text of the Guideline clearly excluded attempt crimes from the  No. 19-4186 United States v. … Rehaif established a mens rea requirement for convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), a statute without an express mens rea element. 139 S. Ct. at 2200.

Mario De Modena, Dba Sixth Avenue Pharmacy v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Portland Retail Druggists Association, Inc. v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc.

743 F.2d 1388 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 2, 1984

THE TIE-IN CLAIM 25 To establish a tying claim, a plaintiff must first demonstrate that the defendant is selling two distinct products as a package. … This record, however, is not nearly sufficient to demonstrate that the operation of these state laws immunizes appellees' conduct under the standard for antitrust immunity set forth in California Retail Liquor Dealer's Ass'n