Case law

Deric Lostutter v. Commonwealth of Ky.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 2023

track for certain felons who qualify,” Lostutter and Langdon did not qualify for that track “because they were convicted, respectively, of a federal offense and of second-degree assault under Kentucky law.” … Finally, Plaintiffs argue that “[c]lemency rules and procedures are not immune from constitutional scrutiny.” Appellant Br. at 43. That may be. But the district court never found to the contrary.

Sidney Coal Company, Inc. v. Social Security Administration, (04-6286), Michael H. Holland, Intervenors (04-6291)

427 F.3d 336 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 19, 2005

See 30 U.S.C. § 932 (h); 20 C.F.R. § 725 (establishing "responsible operator" criteria). 7 . See Pittston Co. v. … Accepting the SSA’s argument would undermine Congress’s clearly stated intent. 12 . The SSA asserts that the Supreme Court's ruling in Smith v.

United States v. Frederick

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 5, 2005

I The evidence at trial established the following. … Turner’s testimony qualifies as admissible background evidence.

United States v. Calloway

189 F. App'x 486 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 26, 2006

The government still had the opportunity to establish that this offense was a crime of violence by introducing evidence that Calloway’s conviction was based on facts that support a crime of violence determination. … This rationale is clearly at odds with the No. 05-3757 United States v.

Mozert v. Hawkins County Board Of Education

827 F.2d 1058 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 5, 1987

The Court also dismissed the individual school board members as defendants on qualified immunity grounds and ordered a hearing on damages against the Hawkins County Board of Education. Id. at 1204 . … However, the Supreme Court has clearly held that it violates the Establishment Clause to tailor a public school's curriculum to satisfy the principles or prohibitions of any religion. Epperson v.

Samuel Whitson v. Knox County Board of Education

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 20, 2012

In her pleading, Principal Summa claimed the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. The district court denied all motions. Principal Summa filed a notice of appeal. … Because this action was “not triable of right by a jury” the court needed Plaintiff’s consent to send the case to a jury; clearly the court lacked that consent.

In Re April 1977 Grand Jury Subpoenas. General Motors Corporation v. United States

573 F.2d 936 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 5, 1978

Clearly this is an exceptional case. … We consider only the appearance of a conflict of interest which, in our opinion, was established by the evidence in this case, and the District Court should have so found. As was stated by Chief Judge Irving R.

United States v. William Stivers

722 F.3d 788 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 17, 2013

Page 50 5336/ 5337/ 5366 the Attorney General’s Office,] is clearly relevant in the case. It’s not unduly prejudicial. … Although the district court did not qualify Agent Briggs as an expert witness, defendants cite various portions of Agent Briggs’s testimony that would qualify as inadmissible lay opinion testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence

United States v. Webb

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 2005

“[A] plea does not qualify as intelligent unless a criminal defendant first receives real notice of the true nature of the charge against him.” Bousley v. … “[W]here the law at the time of trial was settled and clearly contrary to the law at the time of the appeal [] it is enough that an error be ‘plain’ at the time of appellate consideration.”

Michigan Gas Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

115 F.3d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 10, 1997

Standing "is a qualifying hurdle that plaintiffs must satisfy even if raised sua sponte by the court." Community First Bank v. National Credit Union Admin., 41 F.3d 1050 , 1053 (6th Cir.1994). … Clearly, any competitive threat that BPW might pose to MiGas in the future was not caused by the FERC orders authorizing construction of a delivery tap from one gas supplier to BPW's own pipeline. 11 For the same reasons,

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,704 Dr. Malik M. Hasan and Seeme Hasan v. Clevetrust Realty Investors

729 F.2d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 4, 1984

In fact they are better qualified in this regard than are corporate directors in general. 419 N.Y.S.2d at 929 , 393 N.E.2d at 1003 . … The case before us therefore is clearly distinguishable from Auerbach .

Armando Albo v. United States

498 F. App'x 490 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2012

Thus, Albo’s conviction for possessing cocaine clearly qualifies as a prior felony drug offense for enhancement purposes. … Albo’s conviction for possessing cocaine was clearly punishable by more than one year in prison and that is what matters when determining whether a conviction qualifies as a prior felony drug offense for enhancement purposes

Carl Rose v. Secretary of the Department of Labor

800 F.2d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 3, 1986

did not provide petitioner with notice of his right to an administrative hearing and, accordingly, petitioner did not seek administrative review of Otter's determination. 6 The Department of Labor has issued regulations establishing … Times, May 4, 1986, Sec. 1 at 1 2 In this way, the present case is clearly distinguishable from Midland Insurance Co. v. Adam, 781 F.2d 526 (6th Cir.1985).

Grand Rapids Die Casting Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

831 F.2d 112 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 31, 1987

Once a prima facie case of improper motivation has been established, the burden shifts to the employer to prove that “the employee would have been fired for permissible reasons even if he had not been involved in activity … Plant Manager Johnston, in particular, clearly qualifies as a “supervisor” under the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 152 (11), and the company will be liable for the consequences of his actions. NLRB v.

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. International Comfort Products, LLC

585 F.3d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 23, 2009

, and the party who is signatory to a contract creating the obligation to contribute is the `employer' for purposes of establishing withdrawal liability." … The contract clearly provided that costs and expenses shall include, but not be limited to, the enumerated items.

John Ownbey Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

645 F.2d 540 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 2, 1981

We cannot disregard this finding as being clearly erroneous, even if we believe the evidence which supports it is not, as the Tax Court believed, overwhelming. … Under this provision, which is taken from the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, fair consideration need not be present consideration; the satisfaction of an antecedent debt will qualify.

Claude Robinson v. Shelby County Board of Education

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 21, 2009

Page 5 Nonetheless, it is also well-established that “[p]ublic policy strongly favors settlement of disputes without litigation . . . . … This first effort amounted to no more than a “freedom-of-choice” plan, and it barely qualified as that.

United States v. Blocher

116 F. App'x 690 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 23, 2004

Blocher has not met his burden of establishing that he is entitled to a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. … Blocher’s testimony qualifies as “providing materially false information” under U.S.G.G. § 3C1.1. The district court did not err when it applied the enhancement for obstruction of justice.

United States v. Rodrick Tremaine Jackson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 13, 2025

Ursery, 109 F.3d 1129, 1132 (6th Cir. 1997).1 A factual finding qualifies as clearly erroneous only when it leaves the reviewing court 1 The government maintains that we should review only for plain error given that Jackson … Though the policy may be written or unwritten, the evidence must show that it was established at the time of the search rather than a post-hoc rationalization. Tackett, 486 F.3d at 233.

Szeinbach v. Ohio State University

493 F. App'x 690 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 10, 2012

An employee’s decision to report discriminatory behavior cannot immunize that employee from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience. … her required class from four to two hours and suspension of student enrollment in the PPAD graduate program – structural changes in programs at the COP that were implemented based on recommendations of a task force – qualify