Case law

Thomas E. Sutherland v. Michigan Department of Treasury

344 F.3d 603 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 25, 2003

Sutherland and Nancy Karim, both Caucasian, brought suit alleging that they were denied promotions over less qualified minorities. … That minimum requirement was clearly set forth in the 'letters that were distributed to all candidates eligible for the promotions, and was established before any employees applied for the promotions.

United States v. Delores Rupert (93-2373) Michael Hall (93-2380) and Amelia Ramon (94-1105), United States of America v. Charles Carlisle (93-2470)

48 F.3d 190 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 21, 1995

After establishing to the court's satisfaction that Thompson could offer an opinion as a lay witness under Fed.R.Evid. 701, the prosecution had Thompson testify to the street value of the marijuana seized from the truck. … He had not been qualified as an expert in any prior proceeding, nor did he know anyone who had been qualified as an expert in marijuana pricing. 41 We find no error in admitting this evidence.

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,374 Chelsea Associates, a Tennessee Partnership v. John A. Rapanos

527 F.2d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 1975

These findings are not clearly erroneous and accordingly may not be disturbed on appeal. … We cannot say the district court’s finding of non-materiality is clearly erroneous.

James F. BARNHART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PICKREL, SCHAEFFER & EBELING COMPANY, L.P.A., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

12 F.3d 1382 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 1993

subjected to an adverse employment action; (3) he was qualified for the position; and (4) he was treated worse than a younger person. … Even though such a statement is strong evidence of an illegitimate motive, the record clearly establishes a poor working record that began before the alleged statement and which was documented by several complaining supervisors

Danny L. KEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John J. CALLAHAN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee

109 F.3d 270 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 1997

The regulations clearly provide that the ALJ may complete the form without the assistance of a medical advisor. 20 C.F.R. § 404 .1520a(d)(l)(i) (1996). … Only when the claimant has established that he can no longer perform his past relevant work does the burden shift to the Commissioner to establish that the claimant retains the residual functional capacity to perform other

Kamal Youkhanna v. City of Sterling Heights

934 F.3d 508 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 14, 2019

It is far from clear whether plaintiffs qualify as “aggrieved,” whether they appealed using the Zoning Ordinance process, and what, if any, the effect of failing to do so would be. … The Establishment Clause Claim Plaintiffs’ next claim, that defendants violated the Establishment Clause, draws from elements of the discussion above.

United States v. Carter

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 22, 2004

Even assuming that the district [N]either of the 1981 convictions for armed robbery qualify court clearly erred, Horn goes on to explain that “cases are Defendant for an enhancement. … Because this is clearly insufficient to comply findings as to contested issues of fact.

General Motors Corp., Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

700 F.2d 1083 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 2, 1983

But it is clearly required to furnish all relevant information from such work sheets which the Committeeman requests. … Clearly no such abuse has occurred.

Homemakers Home & Health Care Services, Inc. v. Carden

538 F.2d 98 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 21, 1976

Thus, as both parties concede, the only issue left before the District Court was whether Homemakers qualified as a “retail or service establishment” as defined in the Section 13(a)(2) exemption. … We cannot say that the conclusion to which it came was clearly erroneous.”

Harold McQueen Jr. v. Gene Scroggy, Warden

99 F.3d 1302 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 30, 1996

Similarly, because the question is directed more toward the issue of guilt, an issue McQueen never contests with any credible arguments and which was clearly established, rather than sentencing, the harm (if any) is further … Specifically, McQueen claims that the trial judge should have directed the jury that the evidence establishing his intoxication was so conclusive that the jury was required to consider the factor as established.

Donald Kenneth Carlson v. Terry Pitcher, Warden

137 F.3d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 1998

Rather than explaining its theory that the additional claims somehow convert the petition into a “second” petition, the State just sets forth its position as a truism: “Clearly, Petitioner is bringing a second habeas petition … light of this history, every court addressing the issue since AEDPA took effect has held that “a habeas petition filed after a prior petition is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies does not qualify

United States v. Phillip Brooks Barker

553 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 1, 1977

However, the court refused to rule that the defense witness was qualified as an expert to present opinion testimony. … Once the defendant has made a “satisfactory showing,” the government may seek to establish abuse of process.

Thomas Beaudoin v. City of Dearborn Heights Greg Gondek Timothy Adams

876 F.2d 103 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 13, 1989

The district court ruled that the officers were protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity. We affirm. … III. 6 The district court held that Gondek and Adams were entitled to qualified immunity from suit under section 1983 because they did not violate Beaudoin's clearly established constitutional rights. See Harlow v.

Wilson v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters

83 F.3d 747 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 2, 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.

Sevensma v. United States

278 F. 401 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 7, 1922

Duda, who it appears was fully qualified to testify on that subject, that the orders given by the defendant were unusual in amounts and very much out of the ordinary. … A. 629 . [5] The verdict of the jury is sustained by some substantial evidence tending to establish that the defendant dispensed and distributed morphine other than in the course of his professional practice only, and to

The Scrap Yard, LLC v. City of Cleveland

513 F. App'x 500 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 31, 2013

Rather, the complaint merely identifies who these people are, states that they acted under color of state law, and that their actions “violated clearly established federal law and recovery based upon the facts set forth … in this complaint is not defeated by absolute or qualified immunity.”

Abdo Ahmad Nagi v. United States of America and City of Detroit

751 F.2d 826 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 2, 1985

Nagi also asked the CEDD whether a home purchased in Yemen would qualify for a replacement housing allowance. … Conversely, the chronology of events clearly indicate that the denial of benefits caused Mr.

Norman Quincy Wright v. Robin Rockett and Stephen Betts

815 F.2d 81 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 17, 1987

Procunier, 641 F.2d 1295, 1299 (9th Cir.1981). 4 Defendant Betts as a parole officer acted in a capacity functionally comparable to a police officer and therefore was entitled to qualified immunity. See Nelson v. … Those allegations do not state a clear violation of the plaintiff's constitutional rights and therefore defendant Betts was properly dismissed from this action based upon his qualified immunity. 5 Accordingly, it is ORDERED

James R. Henegar v. City of Morristown, Tennessee, Mike Finley

856 F.2d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 1, 1988

for purposes of argument that absolute immunity does not apply, we are of the opinion that a verdict should have been directed for Officer Finley on the ground of qualified immunity. … Briggs, qualified immunity "provides ample protection to all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law." 475 U.S. at 341 .

Trinity Universal Insurance v. Cincinnati Insurance

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. As Mrs. … Unless clearly indicated, it has no place in defining the meaning of terms used in contracts of insurance.