Case law

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)).

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. Sidney Brown

732 F.3d 569 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 27, 2013

First, did the affidavit accompanying the search-warrant application establish probable cause for the magistrate to issue the search warrant? … Moreover, our precedent “clearly establishes that the affiant need only specify that the confidential informant has given accurate information in the past to qualify as reliable.”

William A. Burchett v. Tom Self, United States Attorney Ben Walker, Fbi Agent

30 F.3d 133 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 21, 1994

Claims that lack an arguable basis in law include claims for which the defendants are clearly entitled to immunity and claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. … , the AUSA is entitled to absolute immunity as prosecutors are entitled to immunity for prosecuting activities intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.

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.

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.

Spencer v. Hiram Walker & Sons Grain Corp.

112 F.2d 221 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 11, 1940

Van Arman was not insolvent at the time it was made, nor does it clearly appear that it was insolvent when the resolution of March 12 was adopted. … The assignment to the bank was qualified.

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.”

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.

Rice v. Ohio Department of Transportation

887 F.2d 716 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 13, 1989

Under Messer, the district court's decision to dismiss this claim was clearly correct. B 18 Mr. … The dismissal of first amendment claims on summary judgment may effectively preclude plaintiffs, such as Rice, from establishing a viable first amendment claim by preventing them, as the Seventh Circuit required in Yatvin

Williamson v. Commissioner

100 F.2d 735 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 1938

Two administrators, one of them being the Fifth-Third Union Trust Company of Cincinnati, were appointed and qualified. … The classifications established in § 113 (a) (5) are reasonable and non-discriminatory, and the statute is clearly constitutional.

Daryl Jones v. Jose Garcia

345 F. App'x 987 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 29, 2009

To overcome the officer’s qualified immunity, Jones must show that (1) the facts, taken in the light most favorable to Jones, “show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right,” and (2) the right was “clearly … The question here is not whether that right is clearly established; all agree that it is.

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.

Roscoe C. Rowan, III and Charles A. Washington v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.

360 F.3d 544 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 11, 2004

In order to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, plaintiffs must show (1) that they were members of a protected age class; (2) that they were discharged; (3) that they were qualified for the positions they … Seeber’s experience and expertise clearly exceeded Rowan’s, and were needed in order for the plant to negotiate a Title V permit for the Enriched Uranium Operations.

United States v. Headrick

100 F. App'x 533 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 11, 2004

Here the district court did not clearly err in concluding that Mr. Headrick did not play a minor role. … To qualify under the “safety valve” of § 501.2(a), Mr. Headrick must show by a preponderance of the evidence that he did not possess a firearm “in connection with” the charged offense. Bolka, 355 F.3d at 911-12 .

Union & Planters' Bank of Memphis v. City of Memphis

111 F. 561 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 21, 1901

The case qomes to this: The complainant pleads a judgment as conclusively establishing that a- charter exemption exists, giving it immunity from the tax here involved, which judgment has no force or effect in the court which … Ed. 95, 115 , it was said that “the decisions of this court have clearly recognized that judgments of a foreign state are prima facie evidence only, and that, but for these constitutional and legislative provisions, judgments

Meghan Creech v. Charles Pater

701 F. App'x 456 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 13, 2017

But Creech thereafter consented to the dismissal of that claim. 2 Detective Crouch also argues on appeal that if his conduct violated the Fourth Amendment, it did not violate “clearly established law,” … absolutely immune from liability for their judicial acts.” Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325, 334 (1983).

Bradley v. Austin

841 F.2d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 21, 1988

The Conference version of DEFRA was identical to the Senate version with one added modification, i.e., “a monthly disregard of $50 of child support received by a family [was] established.” … Thus, Congress clearly intended to prohibit the prior practice of excluding siblings with income and resources from the family filing unit in order to allow other family members to qualify for AFDC benefits.

Daniel C. Cadle v. City of Newton Falls, Ohio

961 F.2d 1576 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 1, 1992

immunity from Cadle's fourth amendment claims. … Therefore, they are entitled to qualified immunity. III. 41 For the above reasons, we AFFIRM the judgment of the Honorable David D.

Anthony Boone v. Phillip Spurgess A/K/A Philip Spurgus

385 F.3d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 4, 2004

Boone testified that he “rememberfs] ... clearly” that the .45 was not exposed at that time. Joint Appendix (“J.A.”) at 136 (Dep. of Anthony Boone). … They moved for summary judgment both on the merits and on the basis of qualified immunity; the motions for summary judgment on the merits were granted. II. ANALYSIS A.