Case law

64 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1655, 59 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 41,792 Timothy Jansen, Daniel K. Goens, Robert H. Prasse, Evan Wood, and Mark E. Monahan William Neal, Brian Clemens, Frank Gorrasi, Gregory Hissett, and Philip S. Ramstetter Daniel R. Corry, Noah A. Gibbs, Iv, Timothy P. Burwick, Lawrence D. Cappel, Robert Hart, Jeffrey H. Sweet, Mark E. Kreimer, Nicholas Schibi, and Timothy A. Cunningham, Cross-Appellants (91-3500) v. City of Cincinnati, Scott Johnson, Civil Service Commission, William Miller, and Norman Wells, (91-3498), Cross-Appellees. Tilford Youngblood, Ralph Nichols, and the Class Consisting of Black Applicants for and Black Employees of the Division of Fire of the City of Cincinnati, Intervenors-Appellants (91-3499), Cross-Appellees

977 F.2d 238 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 29, 1992

Paragraph 22 of the decree states in pertinent part: 3 Subject to the availability of qualified applicants, Defendants shall adopt and seek to achieve a goal of hiring sufficient numbers of qualified minority persons to achieve … (emphasis added) 30 The decree clearly permits the use of properly validated test scores to rank recruits. These written examinations, however, have not been validated in accordance with EEOC guidelines.

Christopher Mitchell v. United States

43 F.4th 608 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 5, 2022

As Mitchell sees things, jurists of reason could debate his Sixth Amendment claim because, to his eye, the Supreme Court is “clearly interested” in the issue. … Even if Mitchell had established cause for excusing his default, the district court’s purported error did not prejudice him.

Officer Melissa Kallstrom v. City of Columbus

136 F.3d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 12, 1998

Individuals have “a clearly established right under the substantive component *1063 of the Due Process Clause to personal security and to bodily integrity,” and this right is fundamental where “the magnitude of the liberty … The state must have known or clearly should have known that its actions specifically endangered an individual.

Bah v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 8, 2006

Forced abortion is clearly persecution under the case law, even before the Act incorporated it. … This determination is contrary to the established law of the Sixth Circuit.

Joseph D. Scarso Joseph R. Scarso, a Minor v. Cuyahoga County Department of Human Services

917 F.2d 1305 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 2, 1990

Clearly, judicial immunity applies to Judge Ruben's orders of January 30, October 5, and October 21, 1987. 10 The Supreme Court in Briscoe v. … The employees of the juvenile court are clearly necessary to the functioning of that court and, thus, are entitled to absolute immunity. 11 In Butz v.

Underwood v. United States

267 F. 412 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 1920

The question submitted to the jury was sharply and clearly the latter one — the intent to defraud the Y. M. C. … It is clear that the defendant did not deliver to the post office establishment of the United States the recommendation purporting to have been filled in by Edgar A.

United States v. Alaniz

75 F. App'x 344 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 28, 2003

“A district court clearly abuses its discretion when it applies the wrong legal standard, misapplies the correct legal standard, or relies on clearly erroneous findings of fact.” United States v. … Alaniz now argues that, had the PSR been accurate, he would not have had two prior predicate convictions for distributing drugs and would not qualify as a career offender under § 4B1.1.

United States v. Robert Messersmith

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2026

The district court was independently obligated to calculate the Guidelines correctly based on the two qualifying felonies identified in the presentence report. … There is no reasonable probability that the court would have calculated his Guidelines range based off a lower base offense level of 20 once the presentence report established the existence of the prior convictions.

In Re Grand Jury 89

932 F.2d 481 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 20, 1991

Rosenberry have used the term quasi-judicial in reaching differing conclusions as to the judicial role required to qualify certain agency actions as preliminary to a judicial proceeding. … In each of these cases, the judicial role in the proceedings was so substantial and clearly defined by state statute as to be properly characterized as preliminary to a judicial proceeding.

Administrative Committee of the Sea Ray Employees' Stock Ownership & Profit Sharing Plan v. Robinson

164 F.3d 981 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 14, 1999

We find that a plain reading of the Plan reveals that it clearly grants discretion to the Committee. … Neither this court nor other circuits have established clear benchmarks for these high or low percentages.

17 Employee Benefits Cas. 1006, Pens. Plan Guide P 23880h David R. Gordon W. Queen Dulin Diane M. Meadows Nancy J. Blank Richard Siegel Walter B. Taylor Syvilla D. Burton Phyllis C. Morgan Elizabeth Petrella Robert D. Calver James A. Simmering v. Barnes Pumps, Inc.

999 F.2d 133 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 1993

It is well established that an employer who reserves the right to alter a plan may exercise that right. Musto v. … If the oral policy does not qualify as a plan, then the statements are no more than oral representations.

United States of America, Plaintiff-Cross (90-3421) v. Robert A. Williams, (90-3239), Althea Anderson, (90-3305), Defendant-Cross

940 F.2d 176 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 29, 1991

The court stated that the evidence clearly established that Anderson was less culpable than Williams, and that Anderson played a minor role in the offense within the meaning of § 3B1.2(b). … To qualify for this reduction, the defendant bears the burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she has accepted responsibility for the crime committed. United States v.

Kevin Everson v. Simon Leis

412 F. App'x 771 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 10, 2011

Leis, this court decided that appeal, holding that Leis and Wittich were entitled to qualified immunity on all §§ 1983 and 1985 claims against them in their individual capacities. 556 F.3d at 491-92 . … Because Leis and Wittich had not moved for qualified immunity from the ADA claim against them in their individual capacities, the court did not reach the merits of the ADA claim and remanded to the district court for further

Losantiville Country Club v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

906 F.3d 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2018

The Section 183"Hobby Loss" Factors May Establish Profit Motive The Tax Court also summarily rejected Losantiville's contention that the Section 183 factors may establish profit motive. … Losantiville offers no persuasive argument for finding the Tax Court's conclusion clearly erroneous.

United States v. Willie Watkins

179 F.3d 489 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 10, 1999

The government argues that, although defendant apparently suffered from a depressive disorder (as indicated in the Forensic Medical Center report), that would not qualify him for a downward adjustment in the sentence based … As you read on you clearly see who was the mastermind behind this whole operation. ...

United States v. Keith

559 F.3d 499 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 18, 2009

They were not surveilling Big Daddy’s in particular, but the officers could see the store clearly. … immunity.

Moore v. Detroit School Reform Board

293 F.3d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 9, 2002

Five years after the appointment of a school reform board, the citizens of a qualifying school district are able to vote to determine whether to retain the reform board, the CEO, and the structure established by the MSRA. … ... at the time of enactment of [the MSRA] or that may hereafter become a qualifying school district." 2000 Mich.

Memphis A. Philip Randolph Inst. v. Tre Hargett

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2020

Page 10 Here, the plaintiffs have clearly not demonstrated that they face an actual, concrete, particularized, and imminent threat of harm. … Mohammed was qualified to offer that opinion, even though Plaintiffs’ standing argument does not depend on it.

United States v. Montez Hall

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 25, 2026

We ask whether the district court “relie[d] on clearly erroneous findings of fact, use[d] an erroneous legal standard, or improperly applie[d] the law.” United States v. … Third, prisoners whose imprisonment seriously endangers another person—a dependent—can qualify for release. See id. § 1B1.13(b)(3). And fourth, a prisoner who has been severely abused by custodial staff can qualify.

Johnny Smith v. United States

57 F.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 16, 1995

57 F.3d 1070 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished … He asserted that the court's decision denying his Sec. 2255 motion was clearly erroneous in light of United States v.