Case law

Dykes v. Raymark Industries

801 F.2d 810 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 3, 1986

This reading is supported by the language in section 29-11-102(a) which defines the right of contribution in Tennessee and sets forth the only other exceptions for persons liable for a common injury, i.e., parties who are immune … Under such circumstances, we think it is incumbent upon counsel for the defendant when objecting to the admissibility of such proof to explain as clearly as possible to the judge precisely why the motive and opportunity of

United States v. Hunter

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 9, 2009

Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 348 (1980), and Hunter has not established ineffectiveness. United States v. … Hunter’s qualifying prior offenses yielded a total of twenty criminal history points. However, because no more than four points may be added under U.S.

United States v. Andre Van

427 F. App'x 423 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2011

In both cases, the defendant failed to establish plain error. And the distinctions Van emphasizes do not compel us to find an abuse of discretion in his case. … court commits procedural error by “failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the § 3553(a) factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly

United States v. Charles McKuhn, Jr.

518 F. App'x 375 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 26, 2013

McKuhn sophisticated-sounding phrases and claims of access to his pitch with talk of “private banking,” “diplomatic immunity” and “blanket bonds” from the Federal Reserve that would underwrite the payments. … All that McKuhn challenges is the evidence of intent to defraud, which “may be established by circumstantial evidence” and inferences that suggest “the scheme was reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence

United States v. Lee

288 F. App'x 264 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 19, 2008

Joseph Lee Page 3 The PSR also found that Defendant qualified for 30 criminal history points, which placed him in a criminal history category of VI (thirteen or more criminal history points establishes a criminal … As such an action would clearly affect Defendant’s “substantial right” No. 07-5686 United States of America v.

Mujihadeen v. Harrison

819 F.2d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 27, 1987

819 F.2d 290 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or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 … In so doing, the trial court reasoned that the defendant state officials enjoyed qualified immunity from damages and that the newly adopted TDOC policy regarding name changes had rendered the plaintiffs' equitable claims

United States v. Tommy Lee Hubbard, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 19, 2023

Hubbard objected to the enhanced base offense level, arguing that his prior conviction for robbery under Tennessee law did not qualify as a “crime of violence” under USSG § 4B1.2(a). … “A factual finding is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v.

Wynn v. Jones

886 F.2d 331 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 29, 1989

886 F.2d 331 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 … These allegations provide the basis for a valid qualified immunity defense. See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).

United States v. Timothy Gordon Faasse

227 F.3d 660 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 25, 2000

Batchlor, 435 Mich. 480 , 460 N.W.2d 493 , 500 n. 15 (Mich.1990) (“Clearly, it was intended that the.Michigan statutory procedure authorizing incarceration for child nonsupport should be regarded as civil in nature.”). … Having clarified that point, the Court concluded that several critical factors prevented § 922(q)(l)(A) from qualifying as a valid exercise of congressional authority under the third category.

Groeneveld Transport Efficiency, Inc. v. Lubecore International, Inc.

730 F.3d 494 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 12, 2013

Both components clearly serve a function essential to the product’s operation. … The public policy behind the patent regime is perhaps most clearly set out in Sears, Roebuck & Co. v.

Robert Johnson v. Franklin Farmers Cooperative

378 F. App'x 505 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 19, 2010

B FFC also maintains that “Johnson’s disability means that he was not otherwise qualified for” the position in outside sales and could thus not establish the third prima facie element. … We thus agree with the district court that Johnson established that he was qualified for the position he held–the third prima facie element.

United States v. Timothy Beach

325 F. App'x 402 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 2009

Because the precedent of the circuit and of the Supreme Court clearly establishes that prior felonies need not be included in the indictment to form the basis of a minimum sentence for being an armed career criminal, we … However, §924(e)(1), known as the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), establishes a mandatory fifteen-year minimum where the defendant has three previous qualifying felonies.

United States v. Gaines

227 F. App'x 487 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 28, 2007

Gaines they are clearly erroneous. United States v. Davidson, 409 F.3d 304, 310 (6th Cir. 2005). But we review de novo mixed questions of law and fact. Id. … Instead, the district must look only to the charging document, the terms of the plea agreement, the transcript of the plea colloquy between the judge and the defendant, or “to some comparable record of this information” in establishing

Love v. Export Storage Co.

143 F. 1 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 1, 1906

Such power was clearly conferred on him by the by-laws. … But thé evidence clearly establishes good faith on the part of the bank. There is no evidence whatever to the contrary.

Fortis Corp Ins v. Viken Ship Mngmt

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 8, 2006

Clearly Schelling cannot reasonably expect to sell a potentially dangerous product into the United States, exact its price, and then shirk any obligations that arise when its machine goes awry. … Yet the only specific contact with Michigan (as opposed to the United States) that would qualify as a “plus” factor in the Asahi formulation is the technician’s installation of the saw in Michigan and demonstration of the

Danny Hill v. Carl Anderson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 20, 2020

Webb, 673 F.3d 465, 472 (6th Cir. 2012) (Under AEDPA, “[t]he law in question must have been clearly established at the time the state-court decision became final, not after.”). … established law.

Gary A. Wilkerson v. Ernest Pellegrin, Commissioner Howard Cook, Warden Ricky J. Bell, Captain Richbard Wire Donelson, Co-1 and Barnes, Co-1

802 F.2d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 15, 1986

802 F.2d 461 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 … The district court's holding to this effect is correct. 5 Defendants Dwire, Donelson, and Barnes were properly dismissed whether or not they had qualified immunity.

United States v. Phillip Walsh

654 F. App'x 689 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 29, 2016

In light of Section 538 of the 2015 Appropriations Act, they contend that compliance with state law provides immunity and an affirmative defense against federal marijuana charges. … Hartwick, 870 N.W.2d 37, 42 (Mich. 2015)). 6 For cases that fall outside of the immunity parameters, Walsh argues that Section 8 of the MMMA can provide an affirmative defense if a defendant establishes

United States v. Frank Stavroff

149 F.3d 478 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 20, 1998

However, even if the question had been clearly objectionable, the government may have elected for strategic reasons not to object. … Under these circumstances, we conclude a proper foundation was established for the admissibility of the ledgers. The jury remained free to assign whatever weight it found appropriate to the evidence.

Peggy Miller v. Javitch, Block & Rathbone

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 2009

After discovery, the district court examined the evidence and found nothing to suggest that these four statements qualified as deceptive or misleading under the FDCPA. … Even if it is correct that a lender should not be held liable for immaterial false statements that clearly lack a tendency to mislead, cf. Muha v.