Case law

Robert J. Skalka v. Fernald Environmental Restoration Management Corporation

178 F.3d 414 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 19, 1999

We do not suggest that a plaintiff cannot establish age discrimination when only one of several older employees is treated differently from younger employees. … In addition, Skalka's discharge involved a dramatic departure from established company procedures and was therefore highly "visible" to top management.

United States v. Johnny Temple

25 F.3d 1052 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 20, 1994

As to Mays, a forensic chemist with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation Criminal Laboratory, Temple argues that the district court erred by qualifying her as an expert witness. … In rare situations a defendant may clearly demonstrate an acceptance of responsibility for his criminal conduct even though he exercises his constitutional right to a trial.

Lisa Kay Goins v. St. Elizabeth Med. Ctr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 22, 2024

It is well established in our circuit that a private entity may immediately appeal an order denying an affirmative defense of statutory immunity when the statute “provides immunity from suit, as opposed to immunity simply … Like an order denying qualified immunity, an order denying statutory immunity conclusively resolves an issue separate from the merits of the action.

United States v. Young

553 F.3d 1035 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 30, 2009

The government granted Byford use immunity. Byford testified that between 1996 and 1999 he helped Roller and Young prepare marijuana for sale by “stripping” the plants. … Well, that clearly, that clearly was in furtherance of the conspiracy. It never did come to a fruition, I guess because the deal didn’t go down, but let’s put it this way, that Mr.

Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. Secretary of Ohio

695 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 30, 2012

The potential impact of our construction is merely to incentivize prudent parties to exercise care in drafting settlement agreements and encourage them to ensure that the language they choose clearly indicates whether they … It appears that the supplemental fee award granted in Weisenberger would likely exceed the three percent cap established in Coulter . The cases were decided without trial, see Milburn v.

EEOC v. Hosanna-Taylor Evangelical Lut

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 9, 2010

Accordingly, this Court must accept these factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. See EEOC v. Sw. … The religious entity, in other words, is required to consider qualified individuals with disabilities who satisfy the permitted religious criteria on an equal basis with qualified individuals without disabilities who similarly

Peabody Coal Company v. Carl White

135 F.3d 416 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 3, 1998

The ALJ found that White qualified for the interim presumption because he filed his claim prior to April 1, 1980, was employed with the coal mines in excess of ten years, and established by x-ray the existence of pneumoconiosis … The record clearly shows that Peabody consistently and vigorously pursued (b)(2) and (b)(3) rebuttal simultaneously; at every stage, and in every appeal, Peabody articulated arguments with respect to both standards, which

United States v. Michael Davis (96-5895) and Miles Jones (96-5905)

170 F.3d 617 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 1999

The record establishes that Defendant Davis’ conduct inflicted extensive psychic injury on his telemarketing victims. … This Court concludes that the above facts clearly establish that the tape of Jones’ conversation with Ms. Christian was admissible under both Fed.R.Evid. 803(6), and 801(d)(2), *627 respectively.

Edward Williams v. Donald Schismenos

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 13, 2018

In similar cases we have recognized that such evidence “does not establish that the officers failed to disclose evidence to the prosecutor. … Finally, Schismenos and Leeser are entitled to immunity from Williams’s state-law claims.

Local 1330, United Steel Workers of America, and Frank Georges v. United States Steel Corporation

631 F.2d 1264 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 25, 1980

In lieu of severance allowance, the Company may offer an eligible employee a job, in at least the same job class for which he is qualified, in the same general locality. … The District Judge’s rejection of any formal legal contract claims was clearly mandated by both state and federal contract law.

Sandy Sykes v. United States

507 F. App'x 455 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 29, 2012

February 6, 2004, Muir was enrolled in human research studies or clinical drug trials at the VA and UCMC for the treatment of hepatitis C in veterans, and was enrolled to participate in the studies even though he did not qualify … Finally, Sykes has not cited any cases to establish that there is a private cause of action under the Declaration of Helsinki.

Marmion Pollard v. United States

282 F.2d 450 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 6, 1960

It appeared that none of the witnesses was either acquainted with the defendant or aware of his previous conduct or behavior; they were not asked to express opinions as to his mental condition and were not qualified to do … as conclusively as it is possible to establish insanity in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred.”

United States v. James Harrison Hathaway

798 F.2d 902 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 20, 1986

Berger, Weinstein’s Evidence ¶ 803(6)[02], at 803-178 (1985) (“The phrase ‘other qualified witness’ should be given the broadest interpretation; he need not be an employee of the entity so long as he understands the system … Clearly, proof that defendant was using FNCF funds for personal expenses, rather than paying client accounts when they became due, is relevant on the “scheme to defraud” element.

United States v. Township Of Brighton

153 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 25, 1998

Second, it contends that it did not exercise sufficient control over the site to qualify as a liable "operator" under CERCLA. … Taken literally, this is clearly incompatible with the principle of divisibility Meyer establishes just above.

City of Cadillac v. Woonsocket Inst. for Savings

58 F. 935 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 20, 1893

This act clearly authorizes the issuance of “bonds” hearing a legal rate of interest for any loans lawfully made. It also empowers the council to issue “new bonds,” to extend the time of payment of “bonds falling due.” … The primary purpose of the requirement is such identification of the debt- as will designate the fund out of which it is^ payable, having- reference to the funds established by section 2695.

Joyce M. Fultz v. Larry Edward Gilliam

942 F.2d 396 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 21, 1991

Jones, 542 F.2d 661, 667 (6th Cir.1976), we examined a case presenting facts very similar to those now before us to hold that no implied inter-spousal immunity exception exists to insulate a husband from the criminal penalties … In the ensuing divorce proceeding in July, 1985, the defendant introduced facts acquired from tapes in order to establish marital misconduct by his wife.

Perlean Griffin v. Carleton Finkbeiner

689 F.3d 584 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 20, 2012

After briefing and two hearings on the issue, the district court was clearly familiar with the substance of the evidence and the arguments for and against its admissibility. … “To show plain error, a defendant must establish the following: ‘(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights.’” United States v.

United States v. James Elkins Carol Elkins, United States of America v. Carol Elkins James Elkins

300 F.3d 638 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 2002

This finding was not clearly erroneous, so the statement remains. … The Elkinses, however, argue that the choice of a reasonable level of attorneys’ fees to exempt from civil forfeiture implicates their qualified Sixth Amendment right to criminal counsel of choice, see, e.g., United States

Mizan Arabians, a Minnesota Partnership Gary Libra and Myrna Lysne, Cross-Appellants v. The Pyramid Society, a Kentucky Corporation, Cross

821 F.2d 357 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 10, 1987

Thus, according to the logic of Pyramid’s argument, the damages would always equal zero and the owner would never be able to recover even though the auctioneer clearly violated the consignment agreement. … An Arabian horse qualifies as "Egyptian-related" if fifty percent or more of its bloodline can be traced to purebred Egyptian horses. 2 .

United States v. James E. Fife, United States of America v. Alvin Klein

573 F.2d 369 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 21, 1976

However, at the time the evidence was admitted there had been a great deal of testimony concerning arson and the identification of Merrill Klein as an arsonist was clearly relevant. … Alford establishes the rule that counsel for a defendant is not required to show, or even know, what he expects to prove on cross-examination.