Case law

Page v. Jay

838 F.2d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 1988

Clearly, no procedural due process claims were asserted by Mrs. … Accordingly, upon remand, should it be determined that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity, the issue before the district court will be whether those plaintiffs were deprived of a right to liberty guaranteed

Leonard v. Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary

846 F.3d 832 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 2017

Consequently, Leonard has not established an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … , that the decision of the Ohio Court of Appeals, which clearly evaluated the merits of his claim, “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme

Shaw v. Aurgroup Financial Credit Union

552 F.3d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 2009

Read in context, however, the conditions specified in § 1325(a) are clearly mandatory requirements. See Davis v. Mich. … We therefore hold that the conditions set forth in § 1325(a) are requirements the debtor must satisfy to qualify a Chapter 13 plan for confirmation.

Moss v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.

73 F.2d 339 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 7, 1934

The second complaint of the plaintiffs is of the exclusion of evidence introduced to establish waiver, based upon a course of conduct by the company estopping it from insisting upon timely payment of premiums. … They cannot be construed as a waiver of payment, or as between the company and the insured or his beneficiary an abandonment of rights clearly defined by the contract. The judgment below is affirmed.

McCourt v. California Sports, Inc.

600 F.2d 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 1979

Moreover, the evidence establishes that Los Angeles now has three exceptional players who play the same position as plaintiff. One of them, Mr. … Dionne, is also a first draft choice and is far more established in hockey competition than this plaintiff.

Gomez v. Great Lakes Steel Division National Steel Corporation

803 F.2d 250 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 10, 1986

In awarding damages which covered virtually Gomez's entire career the jury clearly found fraudulent concealment and did not limit its consideration to events occurring after July 6, 1978. … Hier, 363 Mich. 676, 682 , 110 N.W.2d 731, 733 (1961): 18 It is not necessary that a party should know the details of the evidence by which to establish his cause of action.

National Labor Relations Board v. Beacon Electric Co.

504 F. App'x 355 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 4, 2012

A violation of the Act is not established where the failure to hire is due to a lack of openings or the absence of qualified applicants, rather than anti-union animus. … not to be immunized from lawful economic pressure resulting from labor disputes.

Stephen B. Himmel v. Ford Motor Company

342 F.3d 593 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 2004

I respectfully dissent, because in my view Himmel has failed to establish the jeopardy element of Greeley. … An anti-corruption policy is clearly furthered when an employee exposes his employer’s corrupt practices to an outside enforcement authority.

Thomas A. Schweitzer v. Teamsters Local 100

413 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 21, 2005

Schweitzer contends that this statement qualifies as an admission against a party pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2)(A), (C), or (D) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. … In addition, the district court’s order offers no explanation as to why it concluded that the statement in Green’s affidavit was “clearly hearsay.” J.A. at 247.

Curreys of Nebraska, Inc. v. United Producers, Inc.

526 F.3d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 28, 2008

Although Creditors did not dispute the fact that the plan has been substantially consummated at the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, they qualify their concession before this Court by contending that the plan can only be deemed … Debtor has established new business relationships to operate an auction facility, service loans, and to make investments for farmers’ associations.

Carey v. Donohue

209 F. 328 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 2, 1913

This could work no injury to any material right of appellant, and to do more than this would clearly prejudice the rights of the trustee and the creditors. … St. 1901, p. 661) was repealed before such refusals were made (Act May 7, 1910, c. 216, 36 Stát. 352); and this of course removed the foundation of that class of decisions which enforced answers by reason of the immunity

Chrysler Corporation v. Fedders Corporation

643 F.2d 1229 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 18, 1981

Although the Supreme Court did not explicitly describe the issue in Brunswick as one of standing, that decision clearly establishes that a plaintiff must plead an injury of the type § 4 was intended to remedy before his case … Id. at 253 , 78 S.Ct. at 1239 . 50 The uncontroverted affidavits submitted by Interclisa in support of its motion to dismiss establish that Interclisa has never: qualified to do business anywhere in the United States; maintained

United States v. Burdette

86 F. App'x 121 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 16, 2004

The district court clearly would *129 not have admitted the photographs but for Burdette’s testimony and theory. … For example, the district court stated that Burdette’s case did not qualify for an aberrant behavior downward departure “because it involved more than a single agreement to try and murder her husband.”

Michigan Savings & Loan League v. Francis

683 F.2d 957 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 8, 1982

“To bring a case within the [federal question] statute, a right or immunity created by the constitution or laws of the United States must be an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiff’s cause of action.” … [I]t is not necessary to determine . . . but we advert to doubts upon the subject to indicate the injury that would be necessary if the case clearly rested merely only threatened suit in state court.

United States v. John Gray

692 F.3d 514 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 2012

Gray Page 2 insufficient evidence to establish a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. … Count 2 charged that Gray, while “under color of any law, . . . willfully subject[ed] any person in any State, . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or

Falls v. Sporting News Publishing Co.

834 F.2d 611 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 3, 1987

At common law, an expression of opinion could be defamatory, although certain opinions on matters of public concern could qualify as forms of privileged criticism, protected in the name of “fair comment.” … Plaintiff could not prove pecuniary loss, for example, merely by establishing that another newspaper declined to use his columns upon learning that TSN had dropped the columns.

Energy and Policy Inst. v. TVA

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 8, 2026

We have read this to “establish[] a two-prong inquiry: (1) whether the file includes personnel, medical, or ‘similar’ data’ and (2) if so, whether disclosure constitutes a ‘clearly unwarranted’ invasion of privacy.” … We do not read the opinion to clearly evince the latter reading.

Willia Dean Parker v. Mervyn Winwood

938 F.3d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 17, 2019

Plaintiffs also claim that Mervyn’s “efforts to market the infringing work throughout the United States” qualify as purposeful activity in Tennessee. … Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment because Dixon’s expert report clearly establishes a triable issue of fact as to whether Defendants copied Plaintiffs’ song.

United States v. Scotty Lee Hudson

405 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 22, 2005

A warrantless search is “per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment— subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” Katz v. … Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 , 110 S.Ct. 2793 , 111 L.Ed.2d 148 (1990), the case that established the concept of apparent authority.

James R. Smith, M.D. v. Northern Michigan Hospitals, Inc.

703 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 25, 1983

To establish a violation of section 1 of the Act the plaintiff must establish that the defendants combined or conspired with an intent to unreasonably restrain trade. 12 E.g., Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. v. … The present case is in this sense clearly distinguishable from the Greenfield Publishing cases.