Case law

Gerald L. Hendricks v. Gerald F. Miller

822 F.2d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 13, 1987

However, we're stating he is also immune due to qualified immunity and the fact that the lack of state remedies has not been plead under [Vicory v. … However, appeals from the denial of qualified immunity claims are subject to 'the same temporal limitations that are applicable generally to the perfection of appeals.

Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman v. Wayne Carpenter

805 F.3d 710 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 4, 2015

As an initial matter, I concur with the majority in its conclusion that the district court clearly erred in dismissing Abdur’Rahman’s Rule 60(b) motion on the basis that Martinez v. … Assuming the cumulative error claim is .a claim for ineffectiveness of trial counsel, it was clearly procedurally defaulted.

Robert Carl Foley v. Philip Parker, Warden, Kentucky State Penitentiary

488 F.3d 377 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 17, 2007

established federal law. … Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.

Mark Laster v. City of Kalamazoo

746 F.3d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 13, 2014

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under both Title VII and the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act, Plaintiff must show that 1) he is a member of a protected class; 2) he was qualified for the job and performed … Although Plaintiff clearly raised a Title VII retaliation claim, the district court failed to analyze it as such. 3 Instead, the district court only analyzed whether Plaintiff had established a prima facie case of discrimination

Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District

244 F. App'x 607 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 18, 2007

In the first appeal, this court found that qualified immunity protected the school teachers who engaged in the illegal search. Id. … previous several months does not establish a pattern.

United States v. Lawrence

555 F.3d 254 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 11, 2009

That most jurors found the factor not established clearly indicates that they did not view the established fact of Lawrence’s humanity as carrying, in and of itself, any mitigating weight. … Here, too, the bottom line verdicts on the two counts are clearly unanimous.

King v. Bobby

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 10, 2006

Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 412 (2000), the Supreme Court held that, in order to justify a grant of habeas relief, a federal court must find a violation of law that is “clearly established” from “the holdings, as opposed to the … Rather, the issue is “whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable.” Id. at 409.

Pack v. Newsome

865 F.2d 260 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 12, 1988

immunity. … to dismiss, in their individual capacities, on the basis of qualified immunity.

United States v. Michael James Brady

988 F.2d 664 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 1993

Thus, Brady insists that only qualifying crimes next preceded by a conviction for some other qualifying crime may be counted as predicates under the Act. 12 The origin of this view is United States v. … version of the ACCA, Congress established enhanced punishment for armed career criminals.

Yidong Bu v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General

490 F.3d 424 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 2007

“[W]e review the [immigration judgej’s factual determination as to whether the alien qualifies as a refugee under a substantial evidence test.” Yu, 364 F.3d at 702 . … INS, 192 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.1999) (Colombian attorney who prosecuted corruption by members of the opposition party established “a causal connection between the persecution suffered by [him] and his political opinion

United States v. John Anthony Robinson

887 F.2d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 2, 1989

The listed exceptions do not exhaust other events which might qualify as “other proceedings.” See United States v. Mentz, 840 F.2d 315 , 330 n. 31 (6th Cir.1988). … Both provisions clearly allow exclusions of “any period of delay resulting from other proceedings.”

Glenn A. Mortensen v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

440 F.3d 375 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 28, 2006

The penalty stems from Morten-sen’s deductions on his tax return based on his investment in cattle breeding partnerships established by Walter J. Hoyt III. … The court then found that Mortensen failed to establish that he relied on Bales to support his deductions.

Ki (Usa) Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

35 F.3d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 14, 1994

The General Counsel further argues that the discreet manner in which the Nakamura letter was offered to the Company's employees qualifies under Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 232 N.L.R.B. 717 (1977), as the type of "temperate presentation … We consider this finding of the hearing officer to be clearly erroneous.

Maurino v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 24, 2000

His unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as version of the events differed from his previous statements in determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. … How come There is absolutely no indication in its opinion that it you insinuate something like this, that is an out-and- followed this clearly established federal law as determined by out lie?

Kevin Lamb v. Scott Crofoot

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 19, 2025

Because Crofoot is a municipal official, he enjoys qualified immunity. See District of Columbia v. Wesby, 583 U.S. 48, 62 (2018). … Second, Lamb must show that precedent “clearly established” that Crofoot’s actions violated the Constitution. Id. at 63. Lamb’s claims fail at the first step.

Stewart M. Turner v. Allstate Insurance Company

902 F.2d 1208 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 18, 1990

The latter, on the other hand, had to establish, by a similar burden, its claim, equivalent to fraud, for damages. … held: “The general rule is that the burden of proof lies on the party who ‘makes the averment even though it be a negative one.’ ” In a case tried by the circuit judge without a jury we do not reverse unless the evidence clearly

United States v. Tom O'dell, United States of America v. Arlie Murr, United States of America v. D. C. Ramsey, United States of America v. Junior Hicks, United States of America v. Glen Shoemaker

462 F.2d 224 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 16, 1972

directed to the question of whether the error in question here was harmless and affected only insubstantial rights, or whether it was an error of more consequence. 34 Generally the failure of a District Judge to set forth clearly … any indication whatever that the overt acts involved in the two conspiracies were identical in time, place or participants, we also find O'Dell's claim of collateral estoppel without merit. 3 These last quoted paragraphs clearly

Jonathan Cruz-Guzman v. William P. Barr

920 F.3d 1033 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 15, 2019

This court has already rejected the claim that individuals targeted to join MS-13 qualify as a socially distinct group. Umana-Ramos v. … Given that MS-13 members whom Cruz saw every week clearly did not impute 18th Street membership to him, Cruz’s single run-in with other MS-13 members does not clearly show imputed gang membership.

United States v. Gallatin

88 F. App'x 54 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 12, 2004

These factual circumstances establish that Mr. Mueller was participating in significant drug-trafficking activities. … This qualifies him as an organizer, leader or manager or supervisor under ... Section 3Bl.l(c).

32 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,717, 31 cont.cas.fed. (Cch) P 71,345 Ohio Contractors Association v. William Keip, and National Association of Minority Contractors, Intervening Defendants

713 F.2d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 7, 1983

The record discloses that in 1981 the General Assembly passed legislation containing several amendments to the Ohio MBE act, restricting the set of businesses which could qualify for MBE set-asides, clarifying the subcontracting … To qualify as a constitutionally permissible means of ameliorating the effects of identified past discrimination, this type of remedy must be "reasonably necessary" or "substantially related to the achievement of its remedial