Case law

The State Bank of Fraser, Cross-Appellant v. United States of America, Cross-Appellee

861 F.2d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 29, 1988

The fact that in certain circumstances the IRS may not have pursued levies when a bank notified it of a prior lien and setoff, does not establish affirmative misconduct in this case. … (B) Limitation on qualified property.

United States v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 2003

The affidavit clearly implies what United States v. … Indeed, many otherwise after an alleged long career in the drug business to unburden unobtainable convictions are secured through extending his soul of his criminal conduct at 4 A.M. in his half-sister’s immunity

Martin v. Toledo Cardiology Consultants, Inc.

548 F.3d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 21, 2008

To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under this analysis, the plaintiff must show that 1) she was a member of the protected class, 2) she was subject to an adverse employment action, 3) she was qualified … However, the circumstances surrounding this event are clearly in dispute. Plaintiff denied in her deposition that she made the racial slur.

Edward Kendrick, III v. Mike Parris

989 F.3d 459 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 2, 2021

We are unpersuaded that Supreme Court precedent clearly establishes such a specific investigatory obligation in this case. … Nor does Hinton clearly establish that an attorney must hire an expert when, as here, he reasonably expects to be able to rebut the prosecution’s expert effectively with a lay witness’s testimony. Cf.

Mph TN Area Local v. H B Phillips

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 24, 2004

F.2d 1288 (6th Cir. 1988). (6th Cir. 2000) (“If a private party has conspired with state officials to violate constitutional rights, then that party In the present complaint, all of the elements of conspiracy qualifies … holding that individuals who conspire with shared in the general conspiratorial objective (“to deprive [the state actor to deprive individuals of their federally-protected Union] of its rights, privileges and immunities

Ramon Amezola-Garcia v. Loretta E. Lynch

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 19, 2016

The BIA likewise affirmed the IJ’s determination that Amezola-Garcia does not qualify for CAT relief because he did not establish that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if he returns to Mexico. … Finally, the BIA agreed with the IJ that Amezola-Garcia does not qualify for voluntary departure because he “provided false testimony.”

David Ferris, II v. City of Cadillac, Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 30, 2018

Plaintiff appeals the district court’s decision granting summary judgment for Defendants on the grounds of qualified immunity. … “The second is to ask if the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ when the event occurred such that a reasonable officer would have known that his conduct violated it.” Id.

SunAmerica Housing Fund 1050 v. Pathway of Pontiac, Inc.

33 F.4th 872 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 10, 2022

The district court did not clearly state whether it found the term “bona fide offer” to be unambiguous in the context of the LPA. … In this respect, § 42(i)(7) clearly deviates from the general “common law” definition of ROFRs.

United States v. Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority

782 F.3d 260 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 2015

The relator bears the burden of establishing the court’s subject matter jurisdiction over his FCA claims. … The public-disclosure bar “clearly contemplates that the information be in the public domain in some capacity and the Government is not the equivalent of the public domain.” Kennard v.

United States v. Joe Webb

760 F.3d 513 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 28, 2014

At the time of Webb’s sentencing hearing, in January 2011, the prevailing case law in this Circuit, established by United States v. … Because Webb was sentenced to a pre-FSA mandatory minimum after the statute’s enactment, he is clearly entitled to a sentence reduction under Dorsey.

Premier Dealer Servs., Inc. v. Allegiance Administrators, LLC

93 F.4th 985 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 26, 2024

Even legally compliant expressions of facts may possess the modest creativity needed to qualify as original. … Nor was that finding clearly erroneous. Allegiance supports its claim about ambiguous precedent with a single district court opinion.

Cynthia Brown v. David Yost

122 F.4th 597 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 21, 2024

Basically, Yost rejected the title because he did not agree that removing qualified immunity would protect citizens’ constitutional rights. … Yost Page 36 topic of eliminating state qualified immunity. Id.

InRe: Thomas Bowling v.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 7, 2005

Under either Kentucky law or Atkins, Bowling has failed to establish a prima facie case on his mental retardation claim. None of his I.Q. scores falls below the cutoff of 70 established by the Kentucky statute. … Id. at 384 n.37 (“If a trial court found otherwise, we would deem that finding to be clearly erroneous.”).

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

39 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 25, 1994

Here, the broad coverage provisions in S-W’s insurance contracts, though issued prior to the Blankenship decision, may fairly be read to cover this type of liability and the *1330 insurers have not established a contrary … Therefore, we hold that these insurers may not avoid coverage, where the plain language of their policies clearly provides it, on the basis that a suit such as the Viocks’ probably, although not certainly, would not have

Tennessee Department of Employment Security v. Secretary of Labor

801 F.2d 170 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 15, 1986

Both statutes instruct the Secretary to administer congressionally-appropriated funds to qualifying state agencies for use in approved job training and educational programs, and to establish standards for such administration … Congress, in the legislative history, clearly indicated its intent to require “recipients of assistance under the Act, aggrieved by the Secretary’s final decision in cases of funding ... to obtain review of the Secretary’

United States v. Moon

513 F.3d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 16, 2008

It is well established that due process protects against prosecutorial retaliation for a defendant’s exercise of a statutory or constitutional right. United States v. … In addition, "[t]his information must be presented through the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness.” Id. (quoting Fed.R.Evid. 803(6)).

United States v. Morrison

10 F. App'x 275 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 3, 2001

Clearly her emotional state was a result of her fear of being harmed by Defendant. … In light of this finding, his pretrial cooperation is insufficient to establish eligibility for the acceptance of responsibility credit.

Leroy Alexander v. Electronic Data Systems Corporation James Jeros Steven Brechtelsbauer Jane Doe

13 F.3d 940 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 6, 1994

Under that section, anyone who qualifies as a “participant or beneficiary” of an employee benefit plan may sue under ERISA to enforce various rights conferred by ERISA. … The burden to establish federal jurisdiction in this case is clearly upon the *949 defendants as the removing party. Gafford v. General Electric Co., 997 F.2d 150, 155 (6th Cir.1993); Charles A. Wright, Arthur A.

Mary Christine Smith v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service

376 F.3d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 15, 2004

The above-described actions involve the manner in which the USPS supervised and/or criticized Smith’s job performance and assigned job duties to her, actions which normally are insufficient to establish a constructive discharge … In many situations, such as the instant case, the duty to request one’s former job back would immunize the employer’s failure to abide by its legal obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation.

Thompson v. Paasche

950 F.2d 306 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 29, 1991

Thus, his scheme was, by its very nature, insufficiently protracted to qualify as a RICO violation. Cf. id. at 955 (Nelson, J., dissenting). … have relied ... or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.”