Case law

Kolkowski v. Goodrich Corp

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 18, 2006

Thus, under either test the EPP qualifies as an ERISA plan and it cannot be said that the district court clearly erred in making its determination that the EPP constituted an ERISA plan. … These cases are clearly distinguishable from the case at hand. Here, the Court must decide whether Kolkowski received “at least comparable” employee benefits, not whether the stock option plan qualifies under ERISA.

E. Marie Holden, (85-3405), (85-3420) v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., (85-3405), (85- 3420)

793 F.2d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 18, 1986

We hold that plaintiff's attempts to implement affirmative action plans which would comply with Executive order No. 11,246 do not qualify as protected activity under the opposition clause. … Under such circumstances, he clearly could not perform, and in fact was not performing, the duties of his employment.

General Motors Corporation v. Blackmore

53 F.2d 725 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 10, 1931

It was quite clearly understood and intended, we think, that the license should be evidenced by a writing, and that such writing was to have been signed by both Collins and Blaekmore. … We accept the position that, where an “established royalty” is clearly shown, that is, a standard rate at which licenses were voluntarily and freely sold, such “established royalty” must control; but this contemplates an

Curtis Milstead v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union No. 957

580 F.2d 232 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 5, 1978

or not [sic] he was used as a replacement shall be counted in determining whether or not [sic] he has qualified under the above provisions. … A man can gain seniority by qualifying under the above provisions only. (Emphasis added) 3 .

Pearl Dunlap v. Sevier County, Tenn.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 23, 2021

and that, based on his experience, parties were generally reluctant to engage in discovery before the court decided the qualified immunity issue. … The Dunlaps and Baker knew of the relevant issues as early as September 2018, because the county defendants plainly pleaded qualified immunity and other immunity defenses in their answer to the complaint.

Walker v. Hughes

558 F.2d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1977

teachers had not obtained any due process property interest in their jobs because the university Board of Regents had exercised their statutory authority by adopting explicit policies under which none of the plaintiffs qualified … The Government raised no sovereign immunity objection and so we must presume that the Government consented to the suit to the extent that the lawsuit proceeded against Hughes as Warden.

Harold Wayne Nichols v. Stanton Heidle, Warden

725 F.3d 516 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 2013

“[I]t is not an unreasonable application of clearly established [fjederal law for a state court to decline to apply a specific legal rule that has not been squarely established by [the Supreme] Court.” … None of these cases provides clearly established precedent on this particular point.

Eugene Conley v. K.F. Williams

28 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 5, 1994

Conley's argument continues, because the regulations that establish the driving lanes do not qualify as "ordinances." … Section 3-82 deals with the "establishment of ... safety zones, one-way streets or drives and all other ... regulations upon the airport," and Sec. 3-83 clearly contemplates that driving lanes will be established for particular

McCann L. Reid v. Memphis Publishing Company

468 F.2d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 18, 1972

or potential employee’s religious belief contrary to the employer’s established and required work schedule, the court concludes that religious discrimination has not been established by plaintiff’s proof, and concludes, … Dewey was allowed to secure a qualified replacement when he was assigned to work on Sundays if he had been willing to do so.

Appolonio v. Baxter

217 F.2d 267 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 6, 1954

She qualified as administratrix and the business of Mente & Company, Inc., having been conducted with the aid of the claimants for approximately ten months at substantial loss, she succeeded, after much negotiation in which … If the contract is established as to one claimant, it is established as to all. Nowhere is it suggested that the- evidence will differ ámong the claimants, in respect to proof of the alleged agreement.

United States v. Kenneth Joseph Hill

79 F.3d 1477 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 28, 1996

“Once it is established that a defendant was in possession of a weapon during the commission of an offense, a presumption arises that.such possession' was connected to the offense.” Id. … We cannot say that this finding was clearly erroneous. *1487 E.

Martin v. Producers Pipe Line Co.

113 F.2d 817 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 7, 1940

Hence the jurisdictional prerequisites for establishment of a three-judge court to determine these questions did not exist. … Petroleum Exploration, 253 Ky. 119 , 68 S.W.2d 777, 780 , which declares: “It is to be noted in the first group, including pipe line companies and gas companies specifically, that the statute does not undertake to define or qualify

Pearl Dunlap v. Sevier County, Tenn.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 23, 2021

and that, based on his experience, parties were generally reluctant to engage in discovery before the court decided the qualified immunity issue. … The Dunlaps and Baker knew of the relevant issues as early as September 2018, because the county defendants plainly pleaded qualified immunity and other immunity defenses in their answer to the complaint.

Brittany Osberry v. Zane Slusher

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 13, 2018

arrest violates a clearly established right. Kent, 810 F.3d at 396 (“It is clearly established in this Circuit that the use of a Taser on a non-resistant suspect constitutes excessive force.” … The Officers are not entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim. C.

U.S. Padding Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

865 F.2d 750 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 12, 1989

Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), findings of fact "shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous." … We find no basis for concluding that the tax court's ruling was clearly erroneous, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), and we AFFIRM.

Reminga v. United States

631 F.2d 449 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 28, 1980

On this record we are unable to conclude that the district court's finding is clearly erroneous. … Eyewitness accounts of the crash established that there were low-lying clouds in the immediate area of the tower. The plane was flying south.

Keyes v. Paducah & IR Co.

61 F.2d 611 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 9, 1932

Currency of the United States appointed appellant as receiver, who duly qualified and took charge of all of the bank’s assets. … Ed. 1089 : “It would have been equally competent for respondent to have provided for the purchase of the bonds either by the creation of a trust of funds in the hands of the bank, to be used for that purpose, or by establishing

Hallison H. Young v. Bonnie Burks

849 F.2d 610 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 21, 1988

It was not "clearly established law" that these disclosures were unauthorized. Indeed, the alleged disclosures appear to have been specifically authorized by the internal revenue code. See 26 U.S.C. … also asserted that the district court abused its discretion by staying discovery pending its resolution of the qualified immunity claim.

Jascha Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, Ohio

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 11, 2023

The officers moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity and state-law immunity. Granting summary judgment, the district court made a series of holdings. … To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must “show [that] the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right” and that the right was “clearly established.” Robertson v.

Thomas v. Speedway

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 30, 2007

And because establishing the applicability of an FLSA exemption is an affirmative defense, [the defendant] has the burden to establish the . . . elements by a preponderance of the evidence. … Whether she qualifies for the executive exemption depends entirely upon our assessment of the other prong.