Case law

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. John Patrick Farrelly, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee

389 F.3d 649 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 25, 2004

“To qualify for this reduction, Defendants [are] required to show by a preponderance of the evidence that they had accepted responsibility for the crime committed.” United States v. … In this case, although Farrelly viewed the images on the Internet, he did not save, print, or download them to qualify as possession.

Daniel Connaughton v. Harte Hanks Communications, Inc.

842 F.2d 825 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 4, 1988

The scope of the privilege is severely limited to ensure that the media is not granted “absolute immunity to espouse and concur in the most unwarranted attacks ... made by persons known to be of scant reliability.” … Nor is the media immunized from liability for intentionally or recklessly published falsehoods merely because they happen to be reporting about election campaigns or potential political misconduct. .

United States v. Demjanjuk

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 2004

that the district court so identification evidence was not clearly erroneous. … Jones, 107 been qualified as an expert . . . has employed techniques F.3d 1147, 1151 (6th Cir. 1997).

Scott Graham Hartman and Kay Hartman v. University of Kentucky Athletic Association, Inc., Berea College and Mike Johnson, University of Kentucky and Donald Weber

931 F.2d 56 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 1991

Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985), held that a district court's denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to the extent that it turns on an issue of law, is immediately appealable. Id. at 531 ; See also Kennedy v. … This objection establishes a genuine issue of material fact.

Floyd Spruytte, Jr. v. Perry Johnson, Theodore Koehler, Robert Mallette, John Hawley, Audrey Lindstrom

920 F.2d 933 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 1990

The district court determined that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity in regard to these allegations, because there was, at the time of the alleged wrongdoing, no "clearly established right" to a certain amount … immunity, for the reasons stated by that court.

Hines, Inc. v. United States

551 F.2d 717 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 2, 1977

Both §§ 408 and 411, which are quoted above, clearly establish “the standard of conduct of a reasonable man” which the court may apply to defendant shipowner in this case. … Appellant’s cases are clearly inapposite.

United States v. Teh

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 31, 2008

As discussed below, despite the deficient indictment, the district court still found facts which establish that Teh clearly violated 18 U.S.C. § 2318. … Still, we conclude that the evidence clearly established—and the district court clearly found—facts showing that Teh’s actions were contrary to the law provided in 18 U.S.C. § 2318, which makes it illegal to traffic in counterfeit

Appeal of George R. Laure and Esther L. Laure. W-L Molding Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

653 F.2d 253 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 3, 1981

The Tax Court, however, sustained the Commissioner’s claim that the statutory merger did not qualify as a reorganization for tax purposes. … Those proper circumstances have been established here. There was a valid business purpose for the merger. A continuity of the business enterprise otherwise has been shown.

Ernest Smith v. Detroit Federation Of Teachers, Local 231, American Federation Of Teachers, Afl-Cio

829 F.2d 1370 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 29, 1987

Since, in our view, the magistrate erred in determining that Smith's suit was barred by clearly established judicial precedents, and furnished an insufficient basis for concluding that the action against DFT was motivated … Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 349-50 , 95 S.Ct. 449, 452-53 , 42 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974) ("While the principle that private action is immune from the restrictions of the Fourteenth Amendment is well established and easily

William Thomas v. Clay Bright

937 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 11, 2019

Any sign which consists solely of the name of the establishment is an on-premises sign. 2. … Such a sign would presumably qualify for the on-premises exception because the message is related to the activities, goods, and services at the center.

Pointer v. Wilkinson

502 F.3d 369 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 6, 2007

The PLRA requires prisoners who qualify for IFP status to pay an initial partial fee, followed by installment payments until the entire filing fee is paid. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (b). 4 . … Mar. 10, 2006) (holding that dismissals, with or without prejudice, pursuant to rule established by Supreme Court in Heck v.

Walton v. Ford Motor Co

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 28, 2005

Under the facts of this case, Walton cannot carry his burden of establishing that he imparted sufficient notice to Visteon to apprise it of his need to take leave for an FMLA-qualifying injury. … Clearly then, Walton never informed his employer of the reason for his absence until after his employment had already been terminated.

United States v. Freeman Taylor, United States of America v. Homer L. Demoss

236 F.2d 649 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 1956

These maneuvers violated established regulations of the Air Force with which the pilot was thoroughly familiar. … Three hundred miles, even in a flying boxcar, can hardly be classified as simply a slight detour from the area of the employer’s business. 4 Such a geographical deviation alone would under Tennessee law clearly remove these

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Central Transport, Inc.

698 F.2d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 20, 1983

Article 1, sections 3(e) and (f) merely qualify the employee status as defined in sections (a), (b), (c) and (d). … Section 3(f) clearly does not purport to provide an independent basis for the determination of employee status.

Fulcher v. Motley

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

In other words, we held that what was clearly established by Lilly was, in fact, clearly established before Lilly: “Douglas, Bruton, and Lee evidence that the Supreme Court had clearly established the principle that a co-defendant … Inconsistency Between the Kentucky Rule and Clearly Established Federal Law.

Schliewe v. Toro

138 F. App'x 715 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 23, 2005

In § 1983 actions, however, police officers are shielded from liability if their conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Id. … Schliewe’s constitutional rights were not violated by his arrest or detention, there is no need to proceed further in the qualified immunity analysis. A.

Martin v. Barnsville

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 21, 2000

Lillard, MOWERY & YOUELL, plaintiff has established a prima facie case of disability. We Dublin, Ohio, for Appellant. John C. … The arbitrator based his decision solely on the terms of such employee," thereby clearly distinguishing the issue of the bargaining agreement between the union and defendant, misconduct from one's status

Andrew J. Palazzolo, Brandon v. Palazzolo, and Patrick v. Palazzolo v. Robert A. Benson and Dennis Kolenda

82 F.3d 418 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 3, 1996

Plaintiffs alleged violations of their constitutional rights and advanced related state law claims. 3 Defendants moved for summary judgment on plaintiffs' federal and state claims on the grounds of qualified immunity. … The defendants pursued the challenged conduct in the course of their judicial duties and, thus, were clearly entitled to judicial immunity.

Effie Stillwagon v. City of Delaware

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 24, 2018

Law-enforcement officers enjoy qualified immunity from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Rights are clearly established when a legal principle clearly prohibits the officer’s conduct in question. District of Colombia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577, 590 (2018).

61 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 78, 60 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 42,043 Charlett Marie Harper, Cross-Appellant v. Anthony M. Frank, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Cross-Appellee

985 F.2d 285 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 8, 1993

Heilman was the best qualified candidate for this position. This finding is supported by evidence in the record and is not clearly erroneous. … Appointments and promotions are to be made in accordance with procedures established by the Service.