Case law

Yoder & Frey Auctioneers, Inc. v. EquipmentFacts, LLC

774 F.3d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 2014

EquipmentFacts Page 7 qualified witness must attest that the proffered document meets these conditions. Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)(D). … Although Efacts perfunctorily contends that Plaintiffs failed to establish “damage,” the focus of its argument is that RTB was not entitled to a recovery because it failed to produce evidence establishing that it incurred

Cantrell v. Morgan Coal Co.

77 F. App'x 345 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2003

Given that length of employment, claimant can established compensable disability in several ways pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . … While the evidence clearly shows that the deceased had a severe lung condition, neither Dr.

United States v. Richard Hough (00-3380) Lamont Needum (00-3381) Anthony Gibbs (00-3417) Chad Gibbs (00-3434) Antwan Woods (00-3592)

276 F.3d 884 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 16, 2002

This speculation is not evidence and does not establish that it was “clearly improbable” that he possessed the firearms during the offense. The weapons were within easy reach had Woods wished to get them. … Campbell, 168 F.3d 263, 267 (6th Cir.1999), "[n]ot all reasoned explanations ... qualify as limited remands.... A limited remand must convey clearly the intent to limit the scope of the district court’s review....

Monica Rogers v. Henry Ford Health Sys.

897 F.3d 763 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 31, 2018

The district court held that Rogers failed to establish a prima facie case because she failed to satisfy the third prong: that she was qualified for reclassification as a Senior OHRD Consultant. R. 64 (Dist. Ct. … The job description provided by Rogers clearly states that a bachelor's degree is required. R. 55-7 (Pl. Decl. at Ex. 1) (Page ID #1402).

United States v. Paulo Medina-Almaguer

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 12, 2009

Medina-Almaguer’s appeal raises one issue: Does his 1989 state-court conviction qualify as a “drug trafficking offense” within the meaning of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)? … Just as a charging document, written plea agreement or plea-colloquy transcript—which sentencing courts clearly may use, see Shepard, 544 U.S. at 20–21—may not suffice to show that a defendant was previously convicted of

Harry Butts v. Michael Dutton

878 F.2d 1436 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 6, 1989

The court held that Dutton was entitled to summary judgment on this claim under the qualified immunity doctrine because at the time he acted "there was no clearly established procedural due process right to a due process … Because this right was "clearly established" in 1983, Dutton is not immune from liability on this claim.

Dye v. United States

210 F.2d 123 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 8, 1954

Prom the evidence adduced, much of which has been detailed, we think this conclusion of the District Court was clearly erroneous. … trend toward increasing the scope of the waiver by the United States of its sovereign immunity from suit is inconsistent with whittling it down by refinements.

Robert Brown, Jr. v. Captain Baker Sgt. Heidle Skip Ball Joel Smith John Rolling and Patrick Floyd

880 F.2d 414 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 24, 1989

"If the undisputed facts show that defendant's conduct, as a matter of law, did not violate clearly established legal rights, then the district court must grant the defendant summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity … "Regardless of the stage at which the issue of qualified immunity is addressed, the district court should indicate the clearly established right at issue and the factual basis for its conclusion that a genuine issue exists

Heuton v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court

47 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 26, 1995

II. 8 Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense which shields government officials from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights that would have been … When the official's claim of qualified immunity turns on case law, this court must focus on whether, at the time of the official's acts, the right that the plaintiff asserts was clearly established by the decisions of the

Dr. Alexander v. Spaeth v. United States

218 F.2d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 25, 1955

Two government witnesses were qualified as experts in examining such documents, and testified, over objection, that in their opinion the handwritten “4” had been superimposed on an “8.” … another certain circumstance or set of circumstances is established. 11.

Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

711 F.3d 637 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 28, 2013

See-ond, Section 251(b) imposes more extensive duties on carriers that qualify as “local exchange carriers.” … Here, were AT & T not an incumbent carrier subject to Section 251(c) and, instead, were a less-established carrier, the issue would be easy: the Commission clearly would have the authority under Section 251(a) to order interconnection

Derrick Thomas v. City of Eastpointe

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 6, 2017

The reason is simple: If Thomas’s rights were not clearly established, Officer Barr is entitled to qualified immunity. So we turn first to a “particularized” determination based on the facts at hand. Pauly, 137 S. … And in the absence of clearly established law, Officer Barr is entitled to qualified immunity.

United States v. Walter Cylkouski

556 F.2d 799 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 14, 1977

On application of the Government, co-defendants Albers and Burkhart were granted immunity from prosecution and the trial proceeded against the appellant, as a single defendant, on count seven. … We conclude that counsel for appellant did not clearly state the purpose for which he wished to call Father Dye as a witness.

Rodney Graves v. Amber Bowles

419 F. App'x 640 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 18, 2011

Page 6 A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 129 S. … Accordingly, the district court correctly dismissed Graves’s excessive force claim on grounds of qualified immunity. 4.

Robert Allen Williams, Jr. v. Pamela Withrow

944 F.2d 284 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 11, 1991

We believe that an evaluation of “the entire course of police conduct” in this case establishes that Williams’ statements were not voluntary. … Indeed, many otherwise unobtainable convictions are secured through extending immunity in exchange for a defendant’s testimony against more culpable co-defendants.

Herr v. United States Forest Service

803 F.3d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 9, 2015

If Kwai Fun Wong establishes that § 2401(b) does not establish a jurisdictional bar on our power, then it would seem that the similarly worded § 2401(a) does not do so either. … That leaves us with a statute (§ 2401(a)) that does not clearly impose a jurisdictional limit. What of the canon that directs courts to construe waivers of sovereign immunity narrowly?

Crippen v. Kheder

741 F.2d 102 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 1984

Crippen’s receipt of SSI benefits automatically qualified her for the medicaid program as a categorically needy person. … Such a conclusion flies in the face of the record in this case where, from all indications, Crippen was clearly eligible as a medically needy individual at all stages herein.

Rose Walton and John Walton v. State of Michigan, State Judicial Council, and Judge Adam A. Shakoor

918 F.2d 958 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 23, 1990

immunity. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) teaches that officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from civil damage actions where their conduct "does not violate clearly established statutory or

Sigler v. American Honda Motor Co.

532 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 8, 2008

Because our case law clearly prohibits considering such materials, and because Plaintiff-Appellant Shelly Sigler (“Sigler”) presented sufficient evidence to establish the existence of genuine issues of material fact regarding … In Jackson , the Tennessee Supreme Court clearly stated that “we conclude that the consumer expectation test is applicable to any products liability case in which a party seeks to establish that a product is unreasonably

Plant v. Morton Intl Inc

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 12, 2000

The employee need not The district court found that Plant failed to establish that he invoke the FMLA by name in requesting leave for an FMLA- was disabled, because Plant’s “unsupported testimony” did qualifying … In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination Supp. 2d 965 (W.D.