Case law

Josie Jaimes v. Toledo Metropolitan Housing Authority

758 F.2d 1086 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1985

The individual must locate the unit and must qualify for the program to receive the assistance. A different form of Sec-8 housing is "New Construction Housing." … The Secretary is clearly empowered to "withhold funds or defer action in the name of desegregation," 114 Cong.Record 2527-28 (1968), and Title VIII admittedly places fewer administrative and statutory constraints upon his

Frank C. Pasternak Judith Pasternak (92-1681/1682) Anthony J. Cutaia Diane Cutaia David G. Koehlinger (92-1681) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

990 F.2d 893 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 7, 1993

The Tax Court’s findings of fact on this issue are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard. Id.; Roth Steel Tube Co. v. … As discussed above, this determination is not clearly erroneous.

Illinois Central Railroad Company v. Prudie Swift, Adm'x of the Estate of Hayward Swift, Deceased

233 F.2d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 1, 1956

This action for damages for death by wrongful act brought by decedent’s mother, who was qualified administratrix of his estate, was tried to the district judge without the intervention of a jury. … For the foregoing reasons, we think the finding of the trial court, upon which its judgment was based, that the alleged traumatic injury received by appellee’s decedent was the cause of his death, is clearly erroneous.

Akron Board of Education and Conrad C. Ott v. State Board of Education of Ohio

490 F.2d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 15, 1974

Such a suit would require great expense and effort on the part of the plaintiffs to defend and would or might result in an order causing a complete alteration of attendance areas historically established without regard to … Ott clearly is a “person” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (1970), as, of course, are the members of the Board of Education who on motion on remand may be permitted to be added as plaintiffs. 2

State Engineer, of the State of Nevada Water Commissioners, of the Sixth Judicial District Court v. South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Sho-Shone Indians of Nevada Marvin McDade in His Capacity as Chairman of the South Fork Band Council, and United States of America, as Trustee for the South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada, State Engineer, of the State of Nevada Water Commissioners, of the Sixth Judicial District Court, Pershing County Water Conservation District, Petitioner-Intervenor-Appellee v. South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada Marvin McDade in His Capacity as Chairman of the South Fork Band Council, United States of America, as Trustee for the South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada, State Engineer, of the State of Nevada Water Commissioners, of the Sixth Judicial District Court, Pershing County Water Conservation District, Petitioner-Intervenor-Appellee v. South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada Marvin McDade in His Capacity as Chairman of the South Fork Band Council, and United States of America, as Trustee for the South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada, State Engineer, of the State of Nevada Water Commissioners, of the Sixth Judicial District Court, and Pershing County Water Conservation District, Petitioner-Intervenor v. South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada Marvin McDade in His Capacity as Chairman of the South Fork Band Council United States of America, as Trustee for the South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada

339 F.3d 804 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 28, 2003

V 24 Notwithstanding this well-established principle, the federal government argues that Colorado River Water Conservation District v. … States as a current owner of water rights — "Consent is hereby given ... where it appears that the United States is the owner of ... water rights," 43 U.S.C. § 666 (a) (emphasis added) — manifest the requisite intent no less clearly

New York Life Ins. Co. v. Ross

30 F.2d 80 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 1928

As regards established principles of general application this charge is open.to objection for want of accuracy. … So far as we are advised, the McConkey Case has never been criticized in the Supreme Court, and the Thornton Caso has not been qualified nor overruled in this circuit.

United States v. General Shoe Corporation

282 F.2d 9 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 2, 1960

as the Government, put in issue by amended answer (1) these market values, (2) whether they were actually contributed to the trust during the taxable years for which deductions were taken, and (3) whether the trust was a qualified … We think the law is clearly to the effect that a pension or retirement plan such as was here established complied with the Code so as to enable the taxpayer to deduct [under Section 23 (p)] contributions made by the taxpayer

Ned WILKINS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. the EATON CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant

790 F.2d 515 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 13, 1986

Eaton argues that by virtue of his insubordination, Wilkins was not “qualified” for his position as a pilot. We find this argument unpersuasive. … Eaton clearly satisfied its production burden by coming forth with a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for Wilkins’ discharge.

Paul Harcz, Jr. v. Brody Boucher

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 2023

We write further only to highlight and expand on two features of this qualified-immunity case. Free-speech violation. … Clearly established free-speech law. The officers’ arguments that the law in this area was not clearly established faces an imposing hurdle.

Joseph Flanigan v. Scott Panin

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 5, 2018

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Still, to withstand Panin’s qualified immunity argument, Flanigan must also show that his right to be free from fifteen to twenty hits to the head was clearly established at the time of the claimed violation.

Mendoza v. Berghuis

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2008

Finally, what qualifies as “clearly established law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” for purposes of § 2254(d)(1), is itself clear. … Per our precedent, therefore, we treat Deck’s holding, in toto, as if it were clearly established as of the time of the relevant state-court decisions here.

Dimitrios Papas v. Buchwald Capital Advisors, LLC

728 F.3d 567 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 26, 2013

The plan provided for the establishment of the Greektown Litigation Trust, for which Buchwald Capital Advisors, LLC, was named trustee. … It further concluded that even if the four proposed claims were viable, they would be barred by the Tribe’s sovereign immunity.

Williams v. United States

900 F.2d 261 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 17, 1990

The qualified immunity defense is also inapposite because Williams sued the I.R.S. employees in their official capacities. … These allegations are sufficient to support a waiver of immunity under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2410 and to establish the court's jurisdiction despite the prepayment requirements of 26 U.S.C.

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region v. Mike DeWine

931 F.3d 530 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 2019

Thus, even a nominal damages award of one dollar qualifies a plaintiff as prevailing. Id. … Planned Parenthood’s more-than-decade-long preliminary injunction qualifies as such a lasting benefit.

Nemir v. Mitsubishi Motor Sales of America, Inc.

6 F. App'x 266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 2, 2001

Horton was qualified to testify regarding the internal latching process of the seatbelt in question. … However, this statement is clearly contrary to the evidence before the district court.

Mathis & Sons, Inc. v. Kentucky Trans. Cabinet

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 22, 2018

In this interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, the defendants contend (among other things) that the plaintiffs’ right was not clearly established. … of the qualified immunity analysis.

Bahija JABBAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee

855 F.2d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 23, 1988

Thus, the timing requirement is clearly met, if the tax returns are accepted as genuine. … These factors establish that the tax returns are “convincing.” As the worker, Abed was clearly in the best position to know what his sales and expenses were.

Begley v. Consolidation Coal Co.

826 F.2d 1512 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 20, 1987

Under this test, a qualified survivor can be denied benefits despite the fact that the miner had pneumoconiosis and was partially or totally disabled at death, if the employer can establish that the cause of the deceased … Zaldivar, clearly stated that the etiology of Shaftner’s medical problems was not his pneumoconiosis.

Tiara Yachts, Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich.

138 F.4th 457 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 21, 2025

We do not read ERISA to categorically immunize conduct that affects many plans rather than just a few. DeLuca does not hold otherwise. … To qualify for that exception—unlike a self-dealing claim—the plaintiffs needed to adequately plead fraud. Id.

Henry T. Patterson Trust, by Its Trustee, the Reeves Banking & Trust Company v. United States

729 F.2d 1089 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 1984

Clearly, taxpayer here, who (after application of the attribution rules) was the sole shareholder both before and after the redemption, did not qualify under this test. 397 U.S. at 313 , 90 S.Ct. at 1048 . … “Absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, that language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive.” Consumer Product Safety Comm'n v.