Case law

United States v. Thomas

99 F. App'x 665 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 21, 2004

Only one involves a plausible claim of legal error, and that error, if it was such, was clearly harmless. We therefore affirm. … Properly qualified expert testimony is generally admissible if it “will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.” Fed.R.Evid. 702.

Budget Charters, Inc. v. Ivan Pitts

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

The court found that the THSP officers performed a constitutionally adequate inspection of the bus at the Parthenon and that the officers were protected by qualified immunity from Newcomer’s claim that he was arrested on … The district court’s opinion carefully and correctly sets out the law governing the issues raised and clearly articulates the reasons underlying its decision.

L. C. v. United States

83 F.4th 534 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 28, 2023

Through the FTCA, Congress waived immunity for certain tort claims. Id. … established and are subject to dismissal under the DFE,” id. at 11 n.5 (Page ID #297).

Royal Geropsychiatric Services, Inc. v. Tompkins

159 F.3d 238 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 1998

(C) Deductibles established under sub-chapter XVIII of this chapter (including those described in section 1395e and section 1395Z (b) of this title). … The plaintiffs argue that the term “coinsurance,” contained in subparagraph (B), “is clearly meant to be broad.”

Mark Wellman v. PNC Bank

508 F. App'x 440 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 2012

“If a private party has conspired with state officials to violate constitutional rights, then that party qualifies as a state actor and may be held liable pursuant to § 1983 . . . .” Cooper v. … The district court dismissed the state-court judges based on absolute judicial immunity.1 A judge performing judicial functions is absolutely immune from suit seeking monetary relief, even if acting erroneously, maliciously

Berri v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 16, 2006

It is the applicant’s burden of proof to establish that he qualifies for refugee status. … not in conformity with the law, the IJ makes a clearly erroneous factual determination, or the Board needs to reverse the IJ’s decision.” 351 F.3d 717, 727 n.6 (6th Cir. 2003).

Bon-Ing Inc. v. Richard Hodges

700 F. App'x 461 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 30, 2017

Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims on a number of grounds—including absolute immunity, qualified immunity, statute of limitations, and failure to state a claim. … It is the defendants who bear the burden of establishing entitlement to the defense of absolute immunity. See Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429, 432 (1993).

Brandi Booth v. Jonathan Lazzara

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 14, 2026

To decide whether a proposed accommodation qualifies as a modest or fundamental change, we have established a “fact-specific” test that considers the individual circumstances of each case. Bennett v. Hurley Med. … All the officers have responded by asserting a qualified-immunity defense. To rebut this defense, Mrs.

Dearrea King v. City of Columbus, Ohio

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 19, 2022

“In this circuit, it is well established that, for appellate jurisdiction to lie over an interlocutory appeal, a defendant seeking qualified immunity must be willing to concede to the facts as alleged by the plaintiff and … Mason’s arguments in support of qualified immunity as to this claim boil down to factual disagreements.

Lumaj v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 6, 2006

Gonzales Page 2 Lumaj first contends that the BIA’s streamlined review process, specifically single-judge review and the clearly erroneous standard … Thus, she does not qualify as a “refugee” under the INA and is not entitled to asylum.

Dennis McGee v. Thomas Knolton

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 31, 2018

Government officials are immune from civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when performing discretionary duties, provided “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … right; and (b) if so, whether that constitutional right was clearly established such that a “reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”

Local 670, United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America, Afl- Cio, in Its Own Behalf and in Behalf of Its Individual Members, Plaintiff- Cross-Appellee v. International Union, United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America, Afl-Cio Milan Stone Bob G. Long and Local 703, Defendants v. Armstrong Rubber Company R.G. Deangelo and Russell Weymouth, Defendants- Cross-Appellants

822 F.2d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 13, 1987

The agreement was framed as one involving "labor grade changes," stating as follows: 4 [I]n accordance with longstanding and clearly established practices by the parties and consistent with the Collective Bargaining Agreement … International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 , 103 S.Ct. 2281 , 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983), that possibility was not clearly established.

Ernest Abbott v. Harold K. Mines and Thornton Bryan

411 F.2d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 6, 1969

With the Judicial Code of 1948, Congress attempted to establish uniform qualifications for federal jurors. See 28 U.S.C. § 1861 et seq. Certain state exemptions, however, were retained until 1947. … Although federal District Judges clearly have discretion in particular cases to regulate the composition of juries, that discretion is and must be stringently circumscribed by the fundamental rule that federal juries must

CMC Electric, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Administration

221 F.3d 861 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 19, 2000

The schematic clearly indicated that the conduit should terminate at least six inches below the neutral or secondary line, warning that extending the “conduit above the secondary or neutral position at any time may result … CMC argues that the isolated instances in which its employees violated the regulation are insufficient to establish the propriety of a citation.

Juana Villegas v. The Metro. Gov't of Nashville

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 4, 2013

Nelson came to the Eighth Circuit on a grant of qualified immunity, Nelson, 583 F.3d at 525; therefore, all facts were viewed in the light most favorable to the detainee. Id. at 530. … Nelson’s protections from being shackled during labor had thus been clearly established by decisions of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts before September 2003.”

Andrew Hython v. City of Steubenville

94 F.3d 644 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 1996

, rather than absolute, immunity for any advice that he gave prior to the warrantless arrest of plaintiff. … Thus, if any reasonable prosecutor would have understood that Stern's actions violated plaintiff's clearly established right not to be unconstitutionally seized and searched, Stern would not be protected by immunity.

Southern Ohio Coal Co. v. OWCP

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 2025

Southern Ohio Coal argues that the ALJ erred by considering a qualifying PFT administered by the DOL’s designated examiner, Dr. … And Southern Ohio Coal’s brief before the BRB clearly laid out its belief that the April 11, 2019 PFT was noncompliant and that the ALJ erred because “the preponderance of the evidence d[id] not support total pulmonary disability

Jeffrey D. Lundgren v. Betty Mitchell, Warden

440 F.3d 754 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 13, 2006

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), and “[i]t is past question that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United … So the relevant question is not whether the state court’s decision was wrong, but whether it was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.”). S.

Joyce v. Karnes

105 F. App'x 665 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 25, 2004

We may not “issue the writ simply because [we] conclude[] in [our] independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly. … For the reasons persuasively presented in great detail in that Report, we hold that Joyce failed to qualify for federal habeas relief pursuant to AEDPA.

Steve B. Smith v. Jefferson Cnty. Bd. of School Comm'rs

788 F.3d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 11, 2015

It also held that the individual Board members were entitled to legislative immunity. Id. at 217-19. … Thus, the finding is not clearly erroneous. IV. A. To decide whether a governmental action violates the Establishment Clause, we must weave together three main jurisprudential threads.