Case law

Charles W. Turner v. Central States Pension Fund

56 F.3d 65 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 1995

Plaintiff's claim under Rule 60(b)(2) fails, because the alleged evidence--that SHAC had no jurisdiction over his appeal--was evidence that came into existence after judgment was entered and thus does not qualify as "newly … Nor has plaintiff established fraud. Central States did not mislead plaintiff as to the availability of remedies, because the record reflects that administrative remedies were, and are, clearly available.

Kirk Teets v. Cuyahoga County, Ohio

460 F. App'x 498 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 2012

The district court further concluded that the individual defendants were entitled to both absolute and qualified immunity and that the Teetses had failed to assert viable claims for supervisory or municipal liability under … Furthermore, because the Teetses have failed to identify any constitutional injury, we also decline to address the parties’ arguments concerning the applicability of qualified or absolute immunity to Spencer and Morus.

Proutt's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

125 F.2d 591 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 7, 1942

The doctrine of immunity of life-insurance proceeds from creditors’ claims was extended by the Tennessee Supreme Court in Galloway v. Hardison, 166 Tenn. 135 , 60 S.W.2d 155, 156 . … Amendment by implication should not be assumed, unless clearly indicated from the context. Allen v. Henggeler, 8 Cir., 32 F.2d 69 , cited by the Commissioner, is not in point.

Richard M. Frazier v. Stephen J. Huffman, Warden

343 F.3d 780 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 28, 2003

It clearly was. State v. … In so doing, the majority contravenes clearly established precedent of the United States Supreme Court and this Circuit, and “undermine[s] the State’s interest in enforcing its laws.” Coleman v.

Norman Norris v. Premier Integrity Solutions, Inc

641 F.3d 695 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 2011

IV In view of our holding that Premier’s direct observation method was not an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment, we need not consider Premier’s contention that it had qualified immunity for its action. … To establish the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress in Kentucky, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s conduct “has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond

Big Rivers Electric Corporation, Commonwealth of Kentucky and Peabody Coal Company, Intervenors v. Environmental Protection Agency, Russell E. Train, Administrator, Tennessee Valley Authority v. Environmental Protection Agency, and Russell E. Train, Administrator, Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Inc., Intervenor, Ed W. Hancock, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Intervenor

523 F.2d 16 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 4, 1975

Thus, they contend that a system which Restricts Emissions of pollutants in any degree, if included in a plan, would qualify that plan for approval if the other conditions of Section 110 were met. … Under this definition a rule or regulation pertaining to sulfur dioxide or any other contaminant, would qualify as an emission limitation only if it regulates the Amount of that kind of material which may be included in the

United States v. Patrick John Corp.

668 F.3d 379 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 9, 2012

The facts clearly belie that assertion. … Clearly to be a pattern. So therefore, I think it can stand. I think it’s been established in this case.

United States v. Branch

537 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 12, 2008

The Government contended that Branch was ineligible to qualify for safety-valve relief because he had too many criminal history points, and the district court’s finding to the contrary was clearly erroneous in light of this … In Lett, the defendant qualified for safety-valve relief because he had no prior criminal record, and therefore no criminal history points.

Brenda Lindsey v. Detroit Entertainment, Llc

484 F.3d 824 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 1, 2007

Romanski held that "[w]here private security guards are endowed by law with plenary police powers such that they are de facto police officers, they may qualify as state actors under the public function test." … Specifically, Plaintiffs rely on Rule 1003 of the Michigan Gaming Control Board, which establishes various procedures for detained or arrested persons.

Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education

827 F.2d 1058 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 24, 1987

The Court also dismissed the individual school board members as defendants on qualified immunity grounds and ordered a hearing on damages against the Hawkins County Board of Education. Id. at 1204 . … However, the Supreme Court has clearly held that it violates the Establishment Clause to tailor a public school’s curriculum to satisfy the principles or prohibitions of any religion. Epperson v.

Wilson v. International Brotherhood Of Teamsters

83 F.3d 747 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 1996

While this may tend to establish a breach of the union's duty of fair representation, it does not establish hostility such that plaintiffs may now be excused from having failed to pursue available contractual grievance procedures … Associated Distrib., Inc., 923 F.2d 1232, 1235 (6th Cir.1991), where the fact of damage has been established, a lesser quantum of proof is necessary to establish the amount.

EFS, Inc. v. Regions Bank (McLemore)

682 F.3d 414 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 8, 2012

The Trustee’s complaint easily establishes his ERISA-fiduciary status. … Custody of plan assets alone cannot establish control sufficient to confer fiduciary status.

Prokos v. City of Athens

118 F. App'x 921 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 2004

Appellee Brooks further argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity in this matter and Appellant’s claims against him were properly dismissed. … Qualified Immunity Since we find no constitutional violation in this matter, the qualified immunity issue need not be addressed. D.

United States v. Lester Sloman (89-4056), Paul Bauer (89-4057)

909 F.2d 176 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 27, 1990

Another witness, who qualified as an expert on the cost of repairing boats, testified that the cruiser could have been repaired for about $6,500. … Rule 609(a) 1 establishes a general rule that evidence of prior felony convictions is admissible for impeachment purposes if the probative valué of admitting the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant

Jesse Peoples v. Blaine Lafler

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 30, 2013

Peoples argues that the Michigan courts unreasonably applied clearly established federal law when they denied his four claims. … A decision involves an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law if the “state court identifies the correct governing rule . . . but unreasonably applies it to the facts” or if the application is otherwise

United States v. A.D. Roe Co.

186 F.3d 717 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 28, 1999

The government has supplemented the record in this case, supplying information that appears to establish that, although Burns made several FOIA requests before he filed this action, he did not receive any information pursuant … We will not set aside the factual findings of the district court unless they are clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P, 52(a); RMI Titanium Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 78 F.3d 1125, 1135 (6th Cir.1996).

Trinity Universal Insurance Company v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, and Joe L. Chittum, Individually and as of the Estate of Mary Ruthchittum, Deceased, Trinity Universal Insurance Company v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, Joe L. Chittum, Individually, and as of the Estate of Mary Ruthchittum, Deceased

513 F.2d 915 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 16, 1975

Chittum comes within the exclusion, to show that she could qualify under the second condition required to activate the exclusion. 30 As Mrs. … Unless clearly indicated, it has no place in defining the meaning of terms used in contracts of insurance.

United States v. Phillip James Greene

250 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 23, 2001

Such information is clearly sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. Cf. … However, Sixth Circuit precedent clearly establishes that the affiant need only specify that the confidential informant has given accurate information in the past to qualify as reliable.

Kevin Antonio Goode v. United States

305 F.3d 378 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 10, 2002

Apprendi clearly establishes a “new rule,” as the result of Apprendi was not controlled by any “precedent existing at the time the defendant’s conviction became final.” Teague, 489 U.S. at 301 . … To qualify as a watershed rule, the new rule “must ... improve the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of a proceeding.” Sawyer v. Smith, 497 U.S. 227, 242 , 110 S.Ct. 2822 , 111 L.Ed.2d 193 (1990).

Clarence Jones v. Peter W. Vidor Gerald Stiffler R. Parteet R. Montalvo Meinke, Lt.

977 F.2d 581 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 5, 1992

Melo, 112 S.Ct. 358, 365 (1991). 4 Nevertheless, a de novo review of the record indicates that the defendants were protected by qualified immunity. … Before granting qualified immunity, the courts must decide 1) whether the plaintiff has identified a clearly established right that is alleged to have been violated and 2) whether a reasonable official in the defendants'