Case law

Vokas Provision Co., D/B/A the Rich Plan of Western Reserve v. National Labor Relations Board

796 F.2d 864 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 21, 1986

struck by the Board is immune from judicial examination and reversal in proper cases. … refused to permit the five employees to attend the informal conference and when it subsequently laid off the employees for leaving work without permission for the purpose of attending an informal Board conference. 9 Quite clearly

Mounts v. Grand Trunk Railroad

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 5, 2000

Industrial Accident which requires Mounts to establish a separate injury, thereby Comm’n, 12 P.2d 1075, 1076 (Cal. App. 1932)). … As proof, Mounts Any “aggravation” of the original negligently caused asserts that he returned to work in 1995 fully qualified and injury would only affect the plaintiff’s damages, and

Herrera Flores v. Mukasey

297 F. App'x 389 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 2008

Instead, petitioner improperly requests a blanket immunity from the filing deadline. B. … Mukasey qualifies as a “particular social group” for purposes of the Act.

Medical Center at Elizabeth Place, LLC v. Atrium Health System

817 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 22, 2016

But, if the fact that potential competitors shared in profits or losses from a venture meant that the venture was immune from § 1, then any cartel “could evade the antitrust laws simply by creating a ‘joint venture’ to serve … Here, the defendant hospitals clearly did not completely align their interests, economic or otherwise.

Penn Mut. Life Ins. v. Mechanics' Savings Bank & Trust Co.

72 F. 413 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 1896

The proper form in which the question might have been put to a duly-qualified witness was: “Are you atole to say, from your knowledge of the practice and usage among life insurance companies generally, that information of … The authorities are not uniform, and we are able to take that view which is more clearly founded in reason and justice.

United States v. Joe Head

748 F.3d 728 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 9, 2014

Kamper’s first purported error, regarding the MDMA-to-marijuana ratio, is clearly without merit. … To qualify for this enhancement, a defendant must have managed or supervised “one or more other participants,” and not merely the criminal scheme. Id. at cmt. 2; see also United States v.

Brittingham v. GMC

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 16, 2008

To succeed on a negligence claim under Ohio law, a plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty, a breach of that duty, and causation of an injury. See Menifee, Adm’x v. … We agree with the district court that if the claim is limited to the time “before and after employment,” it is clearly not preempted. J.A. at V. I, p. 80.

Scottie Bagi v. City of Parma

714 F. App'x 480 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 26, 2017

If the employee establishes a prima facie case, the burden then shifts to the employer to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the employment decision would have been the same absent the protected … This court held that although Mayhew clearly had a personal interest in his emails, they touched on a matter of public concern sufficient to qualify as protected speech because they concerned the hiring process in general

Minority Employees of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security, Inc. v. State of Tennessee, Department of Employment Security

878 F.2d 1436 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 10, 1989

impact was clearly erroneous. … IV 21 After a thorough review of the record, this Court cannot say that the District Court's conclusion that plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination is clearly erroneous. 22

Morris v. Family Dollar Stores of Ohio, Inc.

320 F. App'x 330 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 31, 2009

court instead of the appellate court, we find that our reasoning in Wysong applies equally to the situation at hand.8 Although Morris should have clarified the theory on which he premised his claim, Family Dollar was clearly … To establish a prima facie case of Title VII discrimination in a typical case, a plaintiff must show that: “1) he is a member of a protected class; 2) was qualified for the job; 3) he suffered an adverse employment decision

Adams v. Standard Knitting Mills

623 F.2d 422 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 23, 1980

Otherwise some misleading solicitations which would trigger liability if shaped in the form of one transaction, would be immune if shaped as the other, or vice versa. 50 The language of the Williams Act clearly demonstrates … The court finds and holds the proof in this case clearly established that, with the knowledge defendant possessed prior to, during and after the 1969 audit compared against the content of the (sic) Peat's 1969 Chadbourn financial

United States v. Stamper

91 F. App'x 445 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 3, 2004

[the defendant] was immune from prosecution because his person was the fruit of an illegal arrest.... Nor is there any claim that the warrantless arrest required the police to release ... [the defendant] or that ... … The district court did not clearly err in applying a two-point enhancement for attempted obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. B.

Campbell v. Robb

162 F. App'x 460 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 9, 2006

In accordance with the doctrine established in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. … Thus, we have held that establishing a prima facie case under either §§ 1981 or 1982 requires the plaintiff to show, inter alia "[t]hat he or she applied for and was qualified to rent or purchase certain property or housing

Nicholas Morrow v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., Tenn.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 2023

Amendment violations and, in any event, qualified immunity would apply. Morrow v. Metro. Nashville of Davidson Cnty., No. 3:19-cv-00351, 2022 WL 884848 (M.D. Tenn. Mar. 24, 2022). … City of Akron, 794 F.3d 574, 578–80, 584–85 (6th Cir. 2015) (holding that it was not clearly established that officers could not forcibly enter plaintiff’s home where officers received information that he “made several

United States v. Mahendra K. Tandon

111 F.3d 482 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 18, 1997

The denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility was clearly appropriate. … Restitution is simply “a factor considered in determining whether the defendant qualifies for a two-level reduction.” United States v. Garlich, 951 F.2d 161, 163 (8th Cir.1991).

9 O.S.H. Cas.(bna) 1848, 1981 O.S.H.D. (Cch) P 25,429 Southern Ohio Building Systems, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and Ray Marshall, Secretary of Labor

649 F.2d 456 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 28, 1981

In the "Discussion" portion of his decision the administrative law judge stated, "The position in which the two employees were working clearly demonstrates that a fall was likely to occur." … 1294 (7th Cir. 1974), discussing promulgation of construction industry standards When the Secretary determines the need for a specific standard, he may receive comments from an advisory committee which must include persons qualified

United States v. Richard Lee Wiegand

45 F.3d 431 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 22, 1994

Id. at 859 . 20 Cases interpreting section 844(i) have found a wide range of buildings that qualify as buildings used in an activity affecting interstate commerce. … Not only has there been no plain error, but the evidence presented at trial was clearly sufficient for a rational juror to conclude that the property at 244 East Van Buren Street was being used in activities affecting interstate

Broan Manufacturing Company, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Associated Distributors, Inc. Republic Manufacturing and Import Company, Inc., Cross-Appellees

923 F.2d 1232 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 23, 1991

Wolbrink, who was qualified as an in-house expert, testified that the Commander products were not properly designed or manufactured from the standpoint of reliability or safety. … Although several of the assumptions on which his mathematical model rests were not supported by rigorous statistical studies, Wol-brink’s estimates clearly were supported by evidence in the record along with information within

John L. v. Adams

969 F.2d 228 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 17, 1992

Outside the prisoner context, the Court has found support for the right of access in the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Chambers v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. … This proposition is clearly set forth in these cases and requires no further discussion.

United States v. Green

532 F.3d 538 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 16, 2008

Gomes, 387 F.3d 157, 161 (2d Cir.2004) (noting that lack of evidence that defendant would qualify for civil commitment weighs in favor of government’s interest). … Griffin established the firm caveat that he had no experience in the prison setting and had great respect for the professional abilities of both Drs. Sixcox and Sigurdson.