Case law

Maria Smith v. Mich. Bell Telephone Co.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 4, 2026

Normal pregnancies are not disabilities under the ADA, but pregnancy-related conditions may qualify as impairments. Spees v. … Smith contends that her increased risk of infection to COVID-19 qualifies as an “impairment” and substantially limited her major life activities during her accommodation period.

Robert Tompos v. City of Taylor

644 F. App'x 678 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 5, 2016

Further, to prove that first prima facie element—that his speech was constitutionally protected—a public employee must establish that (1) “he was speaking as a private citizen, rather than pursuant to his official duties … Dist. 205, 391 U.S. 563, 568 (1968))). 1 The district court did not consider the Defendants’ arguments regarding causation and qualified immunity.

Lynn Lumbard v. City of Ann Arbor

913 F.3d 585 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 10, 2019

In early 2001, the City established a City Task Force and retained engineering consultants to study the problem and devise a solution. … But even if that is true, that language is dicta; the decision in DLX affirmed dismissal of the claim based on Eleventh Amendment Immunity, regardless of the DLX plaintiff's England Reservation.

Audio Technica U.S., Inc. v. United States

963 F.3d 569 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 26, 2020

Rather, the form asked the jury whether certain projects for each tax year counted as qualified research and development activities, and if so, what amount of qualified research expenses was reasonable for each of them. … Saunders, 556 U.S. 396, 409–10 (2009), properly assigning the burden of proof below, the question was whether Audio Technica established by a preponderance of the evidence that its favored percentage is correct.

Cone v. Stegall

14 F. App'x 439 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2001

Standard of Review by the District Court It should be noted that the district court, in referring to the AEDPA term “unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law,” applied the “reasonable jurists” standard … The question, therefore, is whether the decision of the Michigan state court was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, applying the objectively unreasonable standard of Williams .

Fredrick Gross v. David M. Sizemore

104 F.3d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 17, 1996

The district court granted summary judgment for all defendants based upon various forms of qualified and statutory immunity. … IMMUNITY 6 Plaintiff's case fails initially because all defendants are immune from suit. 7 In suits brought under § 1983, qualified immunity protects those police officers "whose conduct does not violate clearly established

Walling v. Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry.

155 F.2d 1016 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 1, 1946

Students are present on the job solely for their own benefit and advantage, in order to qualify themselves for future employment. … Appellant’s difficulty here is that the findings conclusively establish that appellee did not “suffer or permit” the trainees to work for it. See Walling v.

Tussey v. Island Creek Coal Company

982 F.2d 1036 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 1993

Only one of several arterial blood gas tests produced a reading that established total disability, but the ALJ accepted two consulting physicians' opinions that this test, though apparently "qualifying," was unreliable for … C. 29 It is clearly established that opinions of treating physicians are entitled to greater weight than those of non-treating physicians. See, e.g. Sexton v.

28 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1491, 28 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,679

679 F.2d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 7, 1982

The 1980 Decree also established specific hiring and promotion goals. The hiring goal stated that qualified minorities should fill at least 50% of all vacancies. … First, he noted that had plaintiff's allegation been established, the court would clearly have had the power to modify the existing seniority system to require affirmative action in promotions and transfers.

Wooster Rubber Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

189 F.2d 878 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 8, 1951

Neither construction urged is so clearly responsive to the mandates of the instrument as to indicate that either expresses the only possible meaning attributable to the language of the plan. … The petitioner’s witnesses were qualified and unimpeached; and no evidence was offered in contradiction of their sworn statements. In such circumstances, their testimony should have been accepted.

Communities, Inc. v. Busey

956 F.2d 619 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 13, 1992

The 65 Ldn standard was established in response to Congress’s direction that the FAA produce a reliable methodology for measuring noise and human response. … The property in Old Louisville qualified for listing on the National Register because of its architectural importance and historical significance.

American Federation of Government Employees v. Clinton

180 F.3d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 1999

Here, on the contrary, any benefit loss results most clearly from the unchallengeable and unchallenged decision to close .bases. … Hill also would have problems establishing prudential standing, since its claims clearly involve " 'abstract questions of wide public significance’ which amount to 'generalized grievances,' pervasively shared and most appropriately

Karl Fugate v. Ronald Erdos

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 2022

Under the test for qualified immunity, a public official is immune from liability unless the plaintiff establishes: (1) a constitutional violation; and (2) that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ when the event … was clearly established.

Randy Haight v. Scott Jordan

59 F.4th 817 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 9, 2023

The Kentucky Supreme Court’s holding was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … Jordan Page 39 unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

United States v. Robert Lorne Salyer

893 F.2d 113 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 1989

The district court determined that the offense level was 15, qualifying Salyer for a sentence of 21 to 27 months. … Defendant Salyer next argues that the district court’s factual determinations about the victims and the location of their house were clearly erroneous and do not establish victim vulnerability.

United States v. Derek Benton

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 2011

Potential Prejudice to the Government “[T]he government is not required to establish prejudice that would result from a plea withdrawal, unless and until the defendant advances and establishes a fair and just reason … It has already been established that the crime of aggravated assault has as an element the use or threat of force, and therefore qualifies as a “violent felony” for ACCA purposes.3 The initial question we must address, then

64 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1611, 64 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 43,018 the Vanguards of Cleveland v. The City of Cleveland, Local Union No. 93, I.A.F.F., Afl-Cio, Intervenor-Appellant

23 F.3d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 6, 1994

Based on the results of those examinations, the City promoted equal numbers of minority and nonminority firefighters until the lists of qualified minorities had been exhausted. … Under Rufo, "a party seeking modification of a consent decree bears the burden of establishing that a significant change in circumstances warrants revision of the decree.

Novak v. MetroHealth Medical

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 28, 2007

not qualify for leave under any policy. … First, she alleges that her back injury was an FMLA-qualifying condition and that her submitted certification forms sufficiently established the existence of her condition.

Surya Nallani v. Wayne County

665 F. App'x 498 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 2016

“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 … Thus, to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must both “make out a violation of a constitutional right” and convince the court that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the . . . alleged

United of Omaha Life Insurance v. Solomon

960 F.2d 31 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 30, 1992

While United is obviously disadvantaged by Warstler’s decisions, and his actions clearly amount to a waiver of provisions in the Vendors Guide, United’s interests lie in the process alone. … In any event, there are two types of substantive due process claims to which the Parratt rule does not apply: The first category encompasses claims based on a “right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or