Case law

United States v. Warshak

631 F.3d 266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 14, 2010

At least one court has translated this inquiry into the context of qualified immunity. In Roska ex rel. Roska v. … The calls and website printouts clearly fail to satisfy the suppression requirement as well.

David Jerry Williams v. Carter County Tennessee Luther McKeehan David Crockett Arden Hill

895 F.2d 1415 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 16, 1990

to which immunity attaches. … And while Judge Hill is responsible for the omissions complained of, such acts are clearly within the scope of his judicial duties for which he is immune from suit for money damages. See Forrester v.

In Re Abu-Ali Abdur'rahman, Movant. Abu-Ali Abdur'rahman v. Ricky Bell, Warden

392 F.3d 174 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 13, 2004

We cannot rewrite the language of the statute to provide for a second merits adjudication when the statute clearly says otherwise. … See McCleskey, 499 U.S. at 467 , 111 S.Ct. 1454 (noting that the amendment “establishes a ‘qualified application of the doctrine of res judicata’ ” to habeas proceedings by providing “that a federal court ‘need not entertain

Nichols v. City of Cleveland

247 F. 731 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 8, 1917

A; 660) is clearly inapplicable. [5] What is just shown furnishes an answer to another claim made "in behalf of the city. . … It results, in view of the absence of facts amounting to estoppel, that plaintiff is entitled to recover possession of the property and judgment for reasonable rents, issues and profits. [9] There is one qualifying consideration

Lovvorn v. City Of Chattanooga

846 F.2d 1539 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 23, 1988

II. 52 Since the warrant requirement is inapplicable, it is necessary to establish the proper standard of reasonableness to be applied in this case. O'Connor v. … For example, when a police officer is asked to qualify periodically on the firing range with his firearm in order to remain on duty, the purpose is not primarily to find non-qualifying officers but, rather, to ensure that

Jerry Dyson, Ethel Dyson, and Ottway Dyson v. City of Cleveland

812 F.2d 1406 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 1987

If, however, the court is making a finding with regard to whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, the question depends upon the objective reasonableness of defendants' conduct as measured by reference to clearly … established law.

John F. Callahan v. Rouge Steel Company, a Delaware Corporation

941 F.2d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 16, 1991

Thus, Rouge Steel has clearly acknowledged that the sale of the vessels constituted removal of those vessels from service." 45 If these officers received separation allowances under the Marine Officer Policy, I would agree … Similarly, as I understand it, marine officers could receive separation pay if they were simply laid off and not offered another position paying at least 80 percent as much, or if they retired at age 65 without having qualified

Kaleena Bullington v. Bedford Cty., Tenn.

905 F.3d 467 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 25, 2018

Congress clearly stated its purpose in enacting the ADA: (1) to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities; (2) to provide … In these statements, Congress is pronouncing protections that were not already firmly established, which suggests that Congress was not simply codifying constitutional rights established in prior cases.

Wiley Hutcherson v. Lauderdale County, Tennessee

326 F.3d 747 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 9, 2003

The issue of money damages was not litigated in the state court proceedings, but it clearly could have been. Plaintiffs chose to abandon this claim at the state court level, hoping to raise it in federal court. … Establishing this identity of interest for purposes of applying res judicata will "depend[] on the facts of each case."

Young v. Oakland County

176 F. App'x 644 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 19, 2006

Oakland County Whether or not creating additional requirements is an acceptable procedure, the Court concludes that while Plaintiff has established that he was initially qualified for the job, he has … not established that he was similarly situated with Mr.

Blair v. Henry Filters Inc

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2007

an adverse employment decision; (3) he or she was qualified for the job or promotion; and (4) the employer gave the job to a younger employee. … Further, the record does not clearly indicate even when Henry Filters’s plan for workforce reduction began.

United States v. Shaun Smith

681 F. App'x 483 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 7, 2017

Clearly, committing an error of law constitutes abuse of discretion. United States v. Clay, 667 F.3d 689, 694 (6th Cir. 2012). … Otherwise, without adequate disclosure and access, the information cannot be used to establish a reliable sentence.

Flamingo Express, Inc. v. Fed Aviation Admin

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 7, 2008

FAA policy clearly states that certification from the FAA is essential to qualifying as planned service. See FAA Policy 75. … The City maintained, on the one hand, that Flamingo Express was requesting 9-seat service when the company had clearly submitted an application for 10-to-30-seat service.

Dennis Dubuc v. Township of Green Oak

406 F. App'x 983 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 19, 2011

Kruszewski, and Hunt, were entitled to qualified immunity, and that they were entitled to dismissal of the official-capacity claims against them, because the Dubucs’ amended complaint did not refer to any custom, policy … immunity

United States v. Wayne Cedric Bell

762 F.2d 495 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 1985

Wickizer, 633 F.2d 900, 901 (6th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 935 , 101 S.Ct. 1401 , 67 L.Ed.2d 370 (1981) (government has burden of proving the reasonableness of a search once movant establishes prima facie case of … Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 587 , 68 S.Ct. 222, 225 , 92 L.Ed. 210 (1948), “not convinced that a person, by mere presence in a suspected car, loses immunities from search of his person to which he would otherwise be entitled.”

Puckett v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government

566 F. App'x 462 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 21, 2014

In 1999, the LFUCG Council passed two Ordinances establishing policies regarding health insurance coverage for retirees of the LFUCG police force. … In any event, that court’s opinion is clearly distinguishable.

Patrick Simmons v. Robert Kapture

474 F.3d 869 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 26, 2007

Maryland, 373 U.S. 59 , 83 S.Ct. 1050 , 10 L.Ed.2d 193 (1963) (establishing the right to counsel in plea hearings), but these cases were decided prior to the Supreme Court’s establishment of the Teague test for retroactive … Additionally, the Gideon rule establishing the right to counsel at all felony trials is significantly different from the instant rule establishing the right to counsel in a discretionary appeal from a plea-based conviction

Nixon v. Kent County

76 F.3d 1381 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 2, 1996

Clearly, Section 2 protects both African-Americans, who have been discriminated against on the basis of race and color, and Hispanic-Americans, who have been discriminated against as language minorities. … Finally, if the tumultuous history of blacks in America is not enough to qualify us as a “community,” it is difficult to imagine which group could possibly fit that description. A.

Robinson v. Township of Waterford

883 F.2d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 18, 1989

United States, 325 U.S. 91, 103 (1945), the Supreme Court clearly stated that "a requirement of a specific intent to [violate a statute] saves the Act from any charge of unconstitutionality on the grounds of vagueness." … A federal court is not the proper forum to seek an exception to this well-established rule of state law.

United States v. Gerald Daneshvar

925 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 29, 2019

Daneshvar admitted that “most of his patients were billed at a 4 or 5 level even though they qualified for 3 or lower.” (Trial Tr. … Moreover, all of these conditions must be shown by the testimony of a qualified witness. Id.