Case law

United States v. Sanford I. Atkin

107 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 4, 1997

We conclude that the district court’s factual findings are not clearly erroneous, and that the district court properly applied § 3B1.3. … Clearly, the jury did not believe that Sturman had paid Atkin $250,000 for the purpose of preparing such a claim.

United States v. Michael

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 2008

Accordingly, the informal resolution of the Nelson Mill payment dispute cannot qualify as a “settlement” under § 186(c)(2). III. … His expert had solicited bids from a variety of contractors to establish this range.

Thompson v. Bell

315 F.3d 565 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 2003

The Supreme Court in Williams held that a state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law “if the state court arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by this Court on a question of law or if … contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law,’ ” thus entitling Williams to habeas relief.

Lawrence S. Johnson v. Northwest Airlines

53 F.3d 331 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 1995

This finding is not clearly erroneous, and the district court correctly dismissed the plaintiff's disparate treatment claim. … The idea is that some neutral employment practice of the employer creates a proportional disparity between the baseline (a qualified labor pool of 10% blacks, for example), and the derivative (a workforce of 1% blacks), making

Brocklehurst v. PPG Industries, Inc.

123 F.3d 890 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 1997

Clearly Johnson is at least as qualified as Brocklehurst. … In a RIF, qualified employees are going to be discharged. Barnes, 896 F.2d at 1466 .

Dale Edwards v. Robert James Miller Dennis Gunsch James Votypka John Doe

985 F.2d 559 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 1, 1993

The question of whether an official is protected by qualified immunity turns on the "objective legal reasonableness" of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established" at the time the action … Individual claims of immunity must be analyzed on a fact-specific, case by case basis to determine whether the plaintiff's federal or constitutional rights were so clearly established when the alleged misconduct was committed

Kuper v. Iovenko

66 F.3d 1447 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 4, 1995

The Plan provided that the ESOP feature was “designed to invest primarily in qualified” Quantum securities. § 5.01(a), J.A. 581. … Clearly, distribution of the ESOP funds be *1457 fore the trust-to-trust transfer would have made such a transfer impossible.

United States v. Ibraheem Musaibli

42 F.4th 603 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 2022

Analyzing whether the ISIS documents qualified as statements of co- conspirators, the district court concluded that they did not, explaining that “the record does not yet establish the scope of the conspiracy that the defendant … When paired with the other evidence in the record, Al-Madioum’s testimony clearly establishes by a preponderance that an intricate conspiracy to provide ISIS with personnel and services existed, that this conspiracy was supported

Hizam Al-Zawkari v. American Steamship Company

871 F.2d 585 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 9, 1989

the year 1982; however, the district court concluded that he had qualified for the SWP benefits under its “emergency care” provisions. 7 Although plaintiff did not have the requisite 125 days of service in 1982 to qualify … Findings of fact with regard to the extrinsic evidence are accorded the benefit of the clearly erroneous standard of review. 8 .

Wirtz v. Steepleton General Tire Co.

330 F.2d 804 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 27, 1964

In our judgment, they were not clearly erroneous. United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 , 68 S.Ct. 525 , 92 L.Ed. 746 , rehearing denied, 333 U.S. 869 , 68 S.Ct. 788 , 92 L.Ed. 1147 . … particular industry; or * * * (4) any employee employed by an establishment which qualifies as an exempt retail establishment under clause (2) of this subsection and is recognized as a retail establishment in the particular

Claude E. Scarbrough v. Mickey J. Bentley, William v. Ricker and Clifford Freeman

915 F.2d 1572 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 9, 1990

only the issue of qualified immunity has been properly submitted to this Court pursuant to Mitchell v. … light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken."

Frederick A. Patmon v. Michigan Supreme Court Conrad L. Mallet, Jr. Corbin R. Davis, Clerk State Bar of Michigan Edmund M. Brady, Jr., President Attorney Discipline Board for the State of Michigan Miles A. Hurwitz, Chairperson John F. Van Bolt Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission Phillip J. Thomas

224 F.3d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 1, 2000

Thus, it clearly involved a determination of liabilities based on facts and law existing at the time. … Notes: 1 Patmon asserts inter alia, that the rules are impermissibly overbroad and vague, fail to establish reasonably ascertainable standards of guilt, and allow aggrieved attorneys to be disciplined prior to actual notice

Combined Communications Corporation Nashville Banner Publishing Company, Cross-Appellees v. United States Postal Service, Cross-Appellant

891 F.2d 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 1989

This “clearly exceeded its statutory authority.” Id. (footnote omitted.) The court concluded that this action and Domestic Mail Manual § 425.226 were invalid. Id. … Because the language used is clearly conditional and permissive, not imperative, the payment of refunds is discretionary on the part of the Postal Service.

42 Fair empl.prac.cas. 859, 34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,486 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Cross-Appellee v. The Monarch MacHine Tool Company and Local Lodge No. 996 of the International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio, Cross-Appellants

737 F.2d 1444 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 22, 1984

Clearly the interim earnings of the two women should have been ascertained and should have reduced the award of backpay. … We decline to establish such a rule.

Lindsay v. Yates

578 F.3d 407 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 21, 2009

McDonnell Douglas held that a prima facie case of racial discrimination in employment was established when the plaintiff shows that: (i) [] he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) [ ] he applied and was qualified for a job … While this may be true of other circuits, the Sixth Circuit has clearly held that mere satisfaction of the first three elements of the prima facie discrimination case, "without more,” cannot give rise to an inference of unlawful

Wright v. National Warranty Co.

953 F.2d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 1992

Plaintiffs argue that the district court erred in concluding as a matter of law that the securities offered and sold by defendants qualified for an exemption from registration with the SEC. … Further, it is undisputed that the amount of the offering was $1,900,000, clearly within the limits set forth in Rule 505.

Aziz Abdurakhmanov v. Eric Holder, Jr.

666 F.3d 978 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 2012

Holder Page 4 (“BIA”), which upheld the IJ’s decision.1 Specifically, the BIA found that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was not clearly erroneous based on … “[T]o qualify as a refugee,” the applicant must establish “that he or she has suffered past persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion; or . . . show[] that

Willie S. Craft v. Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division

534 F.2d 684 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 12, 1976

Appellees claim that the due process clause has no application because MLG&W “operates just like a private utility in that it is required to have rates sufficient to meet its services . . . and has no governmental immunity … Like Columbia Gas, MLG&W has “no established procedures for resolution of disputes.”

Todd Courser v. Mich. House of Representatives

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 6, 2020

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from standing trial for civil liability in their performance of discretionary functions, unless their actions violate clearly established rights.” Kollaritsch v. Mich. … But dismissal based on qualified immunity is appropriate if a plaintiff fails to plausibly allege facts that, taken as true, “show the violation of a right so clearly established that

United States of America, and Cross-Appellee v. Ekelman & Associates, Inc., and Ekelman & Associates, Inc., Cross-Appellants

532 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 12, 1976

As we hold that the district court’s finding on this point is not clearly erroneous, the government has not established liability on the part of Franklin under the False Claims Act. … They assert that the evidence did not clearly and convincingly establish their liability.