Case law

Birth Control Centers, Inc. v. Reizen

743 F.2d 352 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 30, 1984

According to the testimony of the State’s witnesses, Rule 35(1) only requires that a physician “be qualified to do whatever he or she undertakes; ” the rule does not require that only a specialist perform abortions. 508 F.Supp … Despite this lack of factual findings, the evidence clearly reveals compliance would involve substantial structural alterations of the plaintiff clinics.

Austin v. Wilkinson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 10, 2004

Even if the proper comparison in this case were clearly impinge on the duration of confinement, will henceforth qualify nationwide rather than statewide, the appropriate question for constitutional ‘liberty’ status … As to the third statement of reasons for the decision given to the inmate, had factor, the ODRC clearly has an interest in guaranteeing the led to suspect inmate classifications.

United States v. Massey

663 F.3d 852 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 16, 2011

Massey Page 6 consider the § 3553(a) factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence– including an explanation … In light of his six criminal history points, Massey would not qualify for relief under this section. No. 10-1335 United States v.

Denhof v. City of Grand Rapids

494 F.3d 534 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 28, 2007

Peterson observed: Clearly, the tension between Ofc. Den-hof and the department has escalated to such a degree that it is difficult to imagine how she could continue to work in this environment. … In doing so, he forfeited the protection of the honest belief rule, because the jury could *545 have easily concluded that his reliance on a doctor who had already made up his mind did not qualify as reasonable reliance.

United States v. Battista

646 F.2d 237 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 1981

By Court order of July 13, 1974 twelve members of the grand jury were replaced by twelve members that were newly qualified. … All of the appellants had such knowledge as was clearly shown by the evidence.

Resurrection Sch. v. Elizabeth Hertel

35 F.4th 524 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 25, 2022

These implicit premises went unstated of course, for reasons about which I will not speculate, other than to note that they clearly conflict with established Supreme Court precedent concerning inquisition into the sincerity … Perhaps MDHHS is immune from the ordinary principles of administrative law, but why that might be so the majority never says.

Auger v. ABB Flexible Automation, Inc.

34 F. App'x 160 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

When Michigan’s “economic reality test” is applied to the undisputed facts, it seems equally clear to me that both MTE (the labor broker) and ABB (the customer) qualified under Michigan law as co-employers of Mr. Auger. … the situation was such that Michigan law would clearly treat Mr.

Frank A. Littriello v. United States of America and United States Department of Treasury

484 F.3d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 13, 2007

However, the Court did not hold that a specific number of those characteristics had to be present in order to establish the business entity as a corporation, nor did it address the consequence of a partnership having some … directive to courts to give deference to an agency’s interpretation of statutes that the agency is entrusted to administer and to the rules that govern implementation, as long as they are reasonable, are clear, and are clearly

Leslie Ward v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 2013

We held that the government’s degree of proof was to establish inadmissibility “‘by clear and convincing evidence.’” … In Orlando Ventura, the Board determined that an immigrant failed to qualify for political asylum, but the Ninth Circuit reversed the Board. Id. at 13.

Eugene Woodard v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority

107 F.3d 1178 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 1997

Baxter, therefore, is clearly distinguishable and does not affect our analysis of the clemency interview. … Although Seventh Circuit law did not recognize judicially created use immunity, “[t]he Fifth Amendment of its own force, without the superaddition of a judicial immunity order” would prevent the government from using the

United States v. Gino Solomon

592 F. App'x 359 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 14, 2014

Section 4B1.1(b) of the Sentencing Guidelines establishes that a career offender’s criminal history category is VI, and his offense level is determined by the statutory maximum sentence for the offense of conviction. … The court deducted two points from Solomon’s offense level because he had clearly accepted responsibility for the charges to which he pled guilty.

United Food & Commercial Workers v. OSHA

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 17, 2021

The provision’s reference to immunization and its creation of a limited exception to the Act’s authorization of standards involving immunization would be rendered meaningless if the statute did not contemplate both that “ … And Congress has clearly marked the perimeter of OSHA’s authority: the workplace walls.

Hartman v. Bagley

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 10, 2007

Bagley Page 27 Since the Ohio Supreme Court did not apply clearly established federal law, the relevant inquiry is whether their decision runs “contrary to . . . clearly established … Supreme Court’s clearly established precedent in Mills.

David R. Blake and Betty H. Blake, and Cross-Appellants v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and Cross-Appellee

615 F.2d 731 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 25, 1980

In this respect the Fawick court said: With the above cited legislative history as background, it is our opinion that a two prong inquiry is necessary to determine if a transaction qualifies for special treatment under § … Nevertheless, as stated, the reasoning of Fawick applies here and the Regulation held to be valid in Fawick clearly applies here. The Tax Court initially got off the track in applying § 1235 in William S.

Lorraine E. Nielsen v. Ford Motor Company

876 F.2d 104 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 5, 1989

Thus, Nielsen is unable to establish that the district court erred in its conclusion that she was not similarly situated nor as qualified as individuals who were allegedly promoted ahead of her. 16 Moreover, assuming, arguendo … However, she has not indicated why the court's order was clearly unreasonable or arbitrary.

Buhl v. Kavanagh

118 F.2d 315 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 14, 1941

Putting the word in its ordinary setting, it means the person who establishes the trust or its donor, creator or founder. … If this premise fails, then the Commissioner’s conclusion is clearly erroneous.

United States v. Rayborn

495 F.3d 328 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 2007

Facts Established at the Second Trial 1. … Finally, the previous panel’s decision cannot be described as “clearly erroneous” such that it would require reconsideration.

New Lansing Gardens Housing v. Columbus Metro. Housing

46 F.4th 514 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 24, 2022

Thus, Ohio courts generally give common words their ordinary meaning and technical terms their technical meaning, “unless a different intention is clearly expressed.” … The Housing Authority responds that the plain language of the 2017 Guidebook establishes its applicability to the full 20-year term of the Renewal Contract.

Donna J. Riehle v. Michael P.W. Stone, Secretary of the Army

41 F.3d 1507 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 22, 1994

Finally, Riehle was clearly given an opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance. … Therefore, inasmuch as Riehle was not an otherwise qualified handicapped person, she was not fired based solely on her alleged handicap and, despite Riehle's failure to establish a prima facie case, the defendant showed that

United States v. Keith Scott Brown

946 F.2d 1191 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 13, 1991

During this investigation, however, there were no drug charges pending against Gabbard or Stokes and thus they were not posing as informants in order to gain immunity. 3 On November 13, 1989, Gabbard went to an automobile … In that same case, he said, "It has long been the established practice of the federal courts that, even in criminal cases, the presiding judge may comment freely on the evidence...." Id. See also Graham v.