Case law

Vasco A. Smith, Jr. v. Holiday Inns of America, Inc., and James Dew

336 F.2d 630 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 22, 1964

It seems to this court clearly to be •the sort of injustice which the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits, for the State of 'Tennessee to conceive and (in concert with the United States agency involved) ■carry out a plan to effect … The action was brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (3) which reads: “(3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by

United States v. Howard Jay Kaplan

16 F.3d 1222 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 18, 1994

16 F.3d 1222 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished … (n. 10) (as amended) (emphasis added). 2 6 Upon remand, the district court reconsidered Kaplan's arguments, but found once again that he failed to qualify for the lower offense level under U.S.S.G.

United States v. Jackson

70 F. App'x 844 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 2003

In short, the credible proof in this case established that Matthews voluntarily gave consent to search the residence. The motion to suppress was properly denied on this basis as well. III. … I further understand that my consent is voluntarily given, with the right to refuse, and without any threats, coercion or promises of immunity by officers(s) of the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office.

Wendy Elwell, Plaintiff-Appellee v. University Hospitals Home Care Services, Defendant-Appellant/ Cross-Appellee

276 F.3d 832 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 11, 2002

The FLSA’s implementing regulations prescribe the standards for determining whether an employee qualifies for exemption as a professional. … Although the court could *845 have more clearly explained the relationship between recordkeeping and willfulness, the instructions mitigated somewhat the risk that the jury would misinterpret the court’s subsequent ruling

Burkhart v. Randles

764 F.2d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 18, 1985

The plaintiffs contended that they received no response to this request. 5 The pleadings and evidence submitted by the defendants disputed, but did not clearly refute the plaintiffs’ case as described above. … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Leslee Grinnell v. City of Taylor, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 18, 2022

The defendant officers now seek relief in this interlocutory appeal, contending that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The remaining Defendants timely appealed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.

Lloyd Biggle, Jr. And Damon Knight v. Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., a Delaware Corporation

675 F.2d 107 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 31, 1982

The court adopted a rule that signed and unsigned writings may be read together so long as they clearly refer to the same subject matter or transaction. … Both of the unsigned documents qualified under the Crabtree test to be read together with the signed ones since they “clearly refer to the same subject matter or transaction.” 110 N.E.2d at 554 .

Scott v. Potter

182 F. App'x 521 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 31, 2006

immunity and must be dismissed.”). … This is clearly direct evidence, as the statement facially exhibits a discriminatory animus against older workers in favor of younger ones – no inferences need be made. In Owens v.

Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. Climax Telephone Co.

202 F.3d 862 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 18, 2000

I Climax is an established local exchange carrier (“LEC”) serving the Climax, Michigan area. … Clearly, the Eleventh Amendment claim can be resolved without resolving either of the other claims.

McNeilus Truck & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Ohio ex rel. Montgomery

226 F.3d 429 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 2000

In short, the plausible, albeit dubious, explanations given by Ohio for the statute suffice to establish a rational relation to a legitimate state end, which is all that equal protection requires. … Similarly, McNeilus’s arguments about “state action” immunity are misplaced. McNeilus argues that a state law cannot be the basis for antitrust immunity. See Northern Secs. Co. v.

Singleton v. Carter

74 F. App'x 536 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 26, 2003

In light of these facts, we hold that the state court’s determination that Singleton was not in custody at the time of his initial confession was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. D. … We therefore cannot say that the Ohio Court of Appeals’s decision holding these statements admissible was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. E.

Kirk v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

667 F.2d 524 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 1981

Appellants first challenge is that in contravention of established precedent interpreting the Social Security Act the guidelines attempt to shift the burden of proof on disability. … In Salfi the Supreme Court held that a nine month duration-of-relationship requirement to qualify for social security insurance benefits comported with the due process clause.

Antonio Garcia-Dorantes v. Millicent Warren

801 F.3d 584 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 4, 2015

For instance, if Asians constitute 10% of the general population and 5% of the qualified wheel, the absolute disparity is 5%. … Our circuit has never established a bright-line threshold for either absolute or comparative disparity figures, and in Smith, we clearly held that disparities lower than those present here satisfied the second prong of Duren

Alan Geboy, Petitioner-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Anthony Brigano, Warden, Respondent-Appellee/cross-Appellant

489 F.3d 752 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 11, 2007

A state-court decision involves an unreasonable application of this Court’s clearly established precedents if the state court applies this Court’s precedents to the facts in an objectively unreasonable manner. Brown v. … Accordingly, we find that the Ohio court’s rejection of Petitioner’s sufficiency challenge was wholly consistent with, and not at all contrary to, the clearly established federal law governing this subject.

Barbara Bowers v. The Ophthalmology Group

733 F.3d 647 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 25, 2013

Bowers’s failure to establish this essential element dooms her argument that a conflict of interest exists. … “The determination of whether a plaintiff qualifies as an employee under the Act ‘is a mixed question of law and fact’ that a judge normally can make as a matter of law.” Weary v.

Professionals Direct Insurance v.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 24, 2009

In essence, its position is that the documents prepared by its attorneys while having “dual function” necessarily have a dual purpose and are thus immune from discovery. But that does not follow. … It did not involve the common law exception to the applicability of § 2317.02(A) that was established in Boone v. Vanliner, 744 N.E.2d 154 (Ohio 2001).

United States v. Jerry J. Colahan, D/B/A Iba of Ohio Norman F. Bauer John D. Burrows Russell C. Humphrey, Jr. Simon E. Miller Iba, Inc. Daniel Belsito

811 F.2d 287 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 5, 1987

Clearly nothing in this definition establishes that, merely by being an NAD, a drug is unsafe for use without veterinary supervision under section 201.105. … The most this definition establishes is that the drug is not recognized as safe as labeled.

Nickels v. Grand Trunk Western RR, Inc.

560 F.3d 426 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 18, 2009

Railroad Commission of Texas, 833 F.2d 570, 574 (5th Cir.1987), FELA relief would clearly be precluded on that ground. … Burns, 587 F.Supp. 161, 170 (E.D.Mich.1984) (concluding that walkways are a part of track structure and thus immune from additional state regulation); Black v. Seaboard Sys.

Jerry Stafford v. Rick Hallock

933 F.2d 1009 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 1991

immunity. … , thus precluding a grant of qualified immunity.

In Re Robert C. McCafferty Debtor. Robert C. McCafferty v. Marion McCafferty

96 F.3d 192 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 18, 1996

The domestic relations court clearly did not use the magic words “constructive trust” in its divorce order. … The court’s decree irrevocably established Ms. McCafferty’s separate interest in her husband’s pension benefits and determined that direct payment by her husband would best protect her interest.