Case law

Renfro v. IN MI Power Co

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 18, 2007

The Walling Court also noted that the district court was not “clearly wrong,” citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)’s requirement that a district court’s finding of fact after a bench trial be upheld unless clearly erroneous. … And because establishing the applicability of an FLSA exemption is an affirmative defense, AEP has the burden to establish the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence: “(1) that it pays the [technical writers

Fetch! Pet Care, Inc. v. Atomic Pawz Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 20, 2026

failed to carry its burden of showing that these circumstances clearly demanded a preliminary injunction. … DE 35-29, Establishment of IAFF, PageID 6667.

Belville Mining Company, Cross-Appellants v. United States of America, Cross-Appellees

999 F.2d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 1993

Rejecting an argument that the grant of a right to mine at will impliedly granted immunity from liability for damage to the surface, the Ohio Supreme Court said that “the rule announced in Burg-ner v. … A right of subjacent support of the surface is clearly pointless if the parties contemplate that the surface will be removed.

Charles Fox v. Amazon.com, Inc.

930 F.3d 415 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 5, 2019

In this case, Defendant is clearly the entity “most likely to compensate” Plaintiffs for their injuries. See Owens, 915 S.W.2d at 432. … Section 323 states: 6Accordingly, we need not decide whether the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C § 230, grants Defendant immunity from Plaintiffs’ TPLA claim.

Utility Workers Union of America Afl-Cio v. Consumers Power Company

637 F.2d 1082 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 1981

In establishing standards for qualified pension trusts in the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. § 401 (a)(15)(A), Congress provided that, 26 A trust shall not constitute a qualified trust under this section unless under the … In this regulation, the Treasury Department stated that "the total benefits resulting under (a qualified pension) plan and under such (federal or state) law (must) establish an integrated and correlated retirement system

Pease Company v. National Labor Relations Board

666 F.2d 1044 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 1981

The statement was ambiguous; an innocent interpretation is clearly consistent with the words used, while a threat is present only by a strained interpretation. … As regards the alleged inadequacy of time, the record clearly establishes that the Company had disclosed what the ALJ termed its "principal objectives" by the fifth session on February 8. 237 N.L.R.B. at 1072.

United States v. Everett Cunningham

25 F.3d 1051 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 2, 1994

We cannot say that the district court's decision to credit Officer O'Donnell's testimony over that of defendant's is clearly erroneous. … Once again, nothing in the record suggests that the district court's finding was clearly erroneous. In sum, defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied. B.

Debra A. Fazio and Dean Fazio v. Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services

750 F.2d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 19, 1984

There was, therefore, no medical testimony before the AU which established an impairment or disability within the meaning of the law or regulations. … The claimant does not have a medically determinable impairment of comparable severity to that which qualifies an individual age 18 or over. 6.

Armco, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission

669 F.2d 417 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 1, 1982

Armco fails to establish why the ICC's reading of such clear language should be rejected. … Even if the record were clearly to establish such a practice-which it does not-the 1973 record-keeping requirements can only be understood to require some degree of corroboration between in- and out-bound rail traffic seeking

David Cummin v. Lanny North

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 26, 2018

When a defendant raises qualified immunity, the burden is on the plaintiff to demonstrate that the official is not entitled to qualified immunity, Silberstein v. … of a pending criminal charge—is not clearly established.”

581 Diamonds v. United States

119 F. 556 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 6, 1903

As between the government and Bush there can be no question that the right to forfeit the goods seized has been fully and clearly made out. Bush was caught with the diamonds concealed in his shoes. … Thus treated, it makes allegations sufficient to establish the fraudulent character of the purchase of the diamonds by Hurvich.

Andrew Grosjean v. Sharon Bommarito

302 F. App'x 430 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 4, 2008

Qualified Immunity Finally, the Grosjeans’ argue that the district court erred in granting the Defendants qualified immunity from liability for damages in their individual capacities. … Based on this alone, qualified immunity was proper. Feathers v.

Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. S-W Industries, Inc.

39 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 1994

Blankenship did not "invent" or "recognize" a cause of action or "revoke" any employer's immunity, as the appellee-insurers contend. … The term "this endorsement" clearly applies to the single endorsement entitled "All States Endorsement," and embodies all of the limitations in that endorsement.

United States v. Courtland Reed

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 23, 2025

The government established a foundation for Dirickson’s testimony. … Reed argues that the conviction did not qualify as a “serious violent felony.” The government agrees.

GTE North Inc v. Strand

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 2000

cannot legitimately be construed as a valid waiver of sovereign immunity. § 252(e)(6) (1996). If a state commission fails to approve or The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in College Savings Bank v. … against the agreement resulted from voluntary negotiation or state utility commissions because such commissions constructively waive mediation – the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) their immunity

United States v. Jerry L. Word

806 F.2d 658 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 1, 1986

But here there is evidence of conduct clearly outside the usual course of any professional practice. … The lay testimony clearly established that defendant prescribed great quantities of Dilaudid for large sums of money and that he dispensed these drugs at various locations.

United States v. Young

580 F.3d 373 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 4, 2009

Further, neither Young nor his counsel clearly expressed an intention to preserve the suppression issue on appeal. … And the other two bolster the result in Foreman by making it more difficult to establish that a defendant's prior conviction is a crime of violence. See Chambers v.

Sharon Lee Wright v. United States

717 F.2d 254 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 13, 1983

Pursuant to a national swine flu immunization program, plaintiff voluntarily received a swine flu shot during normal working hours. … Under the circumstances of the present case, the decision to treat established the doctor-patient relationship. After the doctor-patient relationship was established, Wright was injured by negligent medical care.

United States v. Sutton

605 F.2d 260 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 4, 1979

Clearly, subsection (a) is talking about legitimate enterprises only. … The other canon that guides us is that, “unless Congress conveys its purpose clearly, it will not be deemed to have significantly changed the federal-state balance.” United States v.

Maurice Houston v. Clark County Sheriff Deputy John Does 1-5

174 F.3d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 23, 1999

In the alternative, the district court absolved the defendants of liability on the basis of qualified immunity. This appeal followed. … Nor could qualified immunity justify the dismissal of Plaintiffs' case, for even if the officers who may have violated Plaintiffs' clearly established Fourth Amendment rights acted with good intentions, subjective good faith