Case law

Oakland County Board of Commissioners v. United States Department of Labor

853 F.2d 439 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 2, 1988

"The party requesting the hearing shall have the burden of establishing the facts and the entitlement to the relief requested." 20 C.F.R. Sec. 676.90(b). … Clearly, the fees were not incurred as a result of the day-to-day operation of the grant.

Andrew Hess v. Oakland Cnty., Mich.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 5, 2026

Nocerini, 123 F.4th 479, 488–89, 492 (6th Cir. 2024) (affirming the denial of qualified immunity to city officials who allegedly “induced” the prosecution of a plaintiff for charges that the plaintiff alleged reflected retaliation … Hess, however, does not clearly raise that argument in his briefs, let alone suggest that he otherwise would contact Rozell in the future. See Kuhn v. Washtenaw Cnty., 709 F.3d 612, 624–25 (6th Cir. 2013).

Merton Bond v. James F. Cook

891 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 11, 1989

891 F.2d 289 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished … Because the magistrate in this case was clearly acting within his judicial capacity, the district court correctly held that he was entitled to absolute judicial immunity. 6 The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

United States v. Gibbs

174 F.3d 762 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 16, 1999

Attracting a person with the allure of a drug sale and then robbing the person is not enough to qualify as use of a firearm in relation to a drug sale. … The government argues that the presence of the firearm in plain view qualifies as a “display” of the firearm under Bailey . The display, however, must be during a drug transaction.

Donald R. Campbell and Patricia A. Campbell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

868 F.2d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 24, 1989

Commissioner ], 315 F.2d at 737 [9 Cir.1963]. 37 The standard for review is whether or not the Tax Court's finding is clearly erroneous. Polakof v. … Commissioner, 722 F.2d 695 (11th Cir.1984). 38 Based on the record, the finding of the Tax Court was not clearly erroneous.

Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc., Cross-Appellees v. City of Akron, Cross-Appellants, Francois Seguin, Intervenors

651 F.2d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 22, 1981

Two qualified physicians testified that it is safe to perform D & E abortions in an out-patient clinic through the 17th or 18th week of pregnancy. … Nevertheless, this witness stated that this proposition “is not clearly established.”

United States v. Billy Darrell Arnold

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 29, 2026

The rap videos were critical evidence that helped establish both. … But the government provided its reasoning for its belief that Kennedy’s testimony did not qualify as hearsay under Rule 801.

United States v. Tyslen Baker

976 F.3d 636 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 24, 2020

Given that police misconduct must qualify as “purposeful or flagrant” to justify suppression, Strieff, 136 S. … Having interviewed the subject, King clearly could have—and likely should have—included more details about this subject’s reliability based on what had been said to him.

United States v. Saikaly

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 23, 2000

career criminal in the presentence report because two of the For these reasons, I think the category V is applicable three underlying offenses did not qualify as serious drug here. … the weapon was present, unless it is clearly improbable 8 United States v. Saikaly No. 98-3786 No. 98-3786 United States v.

Reuben Jelani Adams v. Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Gov't

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 10, 2025

Davis, 65 S.W.3d 510, 523 (Ky. 2001) (discussing qualified privilege and malice). … However, they fail to clearly 4One could maybe imagine that plaintiffs’ complaint could be referring to something besides or in addition to this “press release.”

Tina Wallace v. FedEx Corporation

764 F.3d 571 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 22, 2014

This decision was clearly erroneous under binding circuit precedent, but we may not revisit it three years later. … Wallace claims that this decision was clearly erroneous under our binding precedent.

J.M. Huber Corporation v. Dolph Roberts, Orphine Roberts, River States Company

869 F.2d 1491 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 17, 1989

Nor did a qualified attorney prepare and file the notice of appeal on his behalf. Instead, C.N. … Appellant clearly cannot base the petition for removal upon 28 U.S.C.

United States v. Akzo Coatings Of America, Inc.

949 F.2d 1409 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 5, 1991

Unlike the waiver of sovereign immunity under the CWA, which is interpreted strictly, objective standards are not required under CERCLA for a requirement to qualify as an ARAR. … Sav. & Loan, supra, are clearly not present here.

United States v. Carr

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 31, 2005

Carr’s guilty pleas clearly established that he violated conditions one and four of his supervised release. … In the present case, the district court clearly announced its intention to sentence Carr to the “maximum” term of supervised release “permissible under the law.”

Robert J. McClear v. Patricia F. Donaldson, David C. Anderson, Barry M. Grant, and Sandra G. Silver

812 F.2d 1407 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 28, 1987

812 F.2d 1407 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service … First, appellee Grant, the judge who presided over that proceeding, was clearly working within the scope of his jurisdiction and is therefore protected by the operation of judicial immunity. Stump v.

Romil Rafael Estrella Taveras v. Carolyn R. Paiewonsky Taveraz

477 F.3d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 2007

After Sosa , it is incontrovertible that not only must a cause of action directly implicate the law of nations, jurisdiction under the ATS can be found only if the claim implicates a law of nations norm that is as clearly … Taveraz, a parent with full guardianship or custody, qualify as abduction under this provision. Id. at pt. I, art. XXXV.

United States v. Miller

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 1, 2008

This is clearly beyond what the Constitution permits. Id. at 626. C. … George, 486 F.3d 1120, 1125 (9th Cir. 2007) (observing that “[j]ust as false statements are not immunized by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, . . . baseless litigation is not immunized by the First Amendment

Flatt on Behalf of Flatt v. Schma

51 F.3d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 1995

51 F.3d 271 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished … Claims that lack an arguable basis in law include claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does not exist.

Dennis Willard v. Huntington Ford, Inc.

952 F.3d 795 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 11, 2020

Prima Facie Case A plaintiff establishes his prima facie case by showing that (1) he is a member of a protected group, (2) he was qualified for the position in question, (3) his employer took an adverse employment … Failure to Show up or Call in Willard has pointed clearly to a genuine and material fact dispute regarding the length of his suspension, leading to his tardy appearance on Wednesday, December 28, 2016, which formed

United States v. James Thorpe

471 F.3d 652 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 27, 2006

He notes that unlike the “clearly set forth” statutory crimes at issue in Armstrong and Bass, “the Government has never set forth the criteria for how a case is determined to qualify for PSN prosecution.” … In any event, the district court’s order granting Thorpe’s discovery motion was clearly erroneous on its face.