Case law

Coleman v. American Red Cross

23 F.3d 1091 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 24, 1994

That blood apparently contained the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), the virus that causes Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). Mrs. … As the Seventh Circuit opined in Marrocco, whose facts parallel the facts here, "wilful and unexcused violations of the protective order here certainly qualify as 'contumacious conduct.' " 966 F.2d at 224 .

United States v. Xiaorong You

74 F.4th 378 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 11, 2023

As we discuss below, this argument does not address what the government must prove to establish that knowledge. … In addressing vagueness, this court established what intent was needed to violate the statute.

Mary Glover Lynda Gates Jimmie Ann Brown Manetta Gant Jacalyn M. Settles and Several Jane Does, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Perry Johnson, Director, Michigan Department of Corrections Florence R. Crane G. Robert Cotton Thomas K. Eardley, Jr. B. James George, Jr. Duane L. Waters the Michigan Corrections Commissions William Kime, Director, Bureau of Programs Robert Brown, Jr., Director, Bureau of Correctional Facilities Frank Beetham, Director, Bureau of Prison Industries Richard Nelson, Director, Bureau of Field Services Gloria Richardson, Superintendent, Huron Valley Women's Facility Dorothy Costen, Director of Treatment, Huron Valley Women's Facility and Clyde Graven, Sheriff, Kalamazoo County Individually and in Their Official Capacities

198 F.3d 557 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 17, 2000

The district court's findings in this regard were not clearly erroneous. 3. … This finding was not clearly erroneous. C.

Speight v. Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins.

115 F. App'x 789 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 13, 2004

Bernet’s deposition to establish that Speight’s return to work was not limited by his mental condition. Dr. Bernet testified to the same effect at trial. … In that case, Speight could qualify as residually disabled if he could only work four- fifths or three-quarters of the hours that he used to work.

Taylor v. TECO Barge Line

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 20, 2008

And Wabeke testified that such a level of protection would not qualify as level A personal protective equipment. … This evidence clearly supports the conclusion that Taylor’s reaction was not idiosyncratic and that Bitumastic is not harmless.

United States v. Robert Suarez

263 F.3d 468 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 8, 2001

This proffer was made under a grant of limited immunity, in place of a hearing pursuant to Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972). … See id. at 456 & n.10. 32 Clearly the superseding indictment was based to some extent on evidence unavailable at the time of the first indictment.

United States v. Eddie Harris

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Nov 5, 2019

Harris contends that the district court erred by finding that he had three qualifying violent felonies. It is undisputed that Harris’s two murder convictions qualify as ACCA predicate offenses. … However, he argues that neither of his robbery convictions qualify as violent felonies, leaving him one offense short of qualifying as an armed career criminal. We review this claim de novo. United States v.

United States v. Collin Taplin, Jr.

954 F.2d 1256 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 22, 1992

By contrast, testimony presented at a grand jury proceeding is not subject to cross-examination and therefore does not qualify under the rule. Young v. … --rather than a "firmly established" hearsay exception such as Rule 804(b)(1). See id. at 331

Static Control Components, Inc v. Lexmark International, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 29, 2012

We agree with Lexmark that its efforts in federal court, as alleged, should be immune from antitrust suit. C. … However, this distinction was never clearly made to the jury. Lexmark’s claim fails upon closer examination of the jury’s instructions.

Blanche Barber v. Charter Twp. of Springfield, Mich.

31 F.4th 382 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 11, 2022

Standing “For a dispute to qualify as an Article III ‘case [or controversy]’ that a federal court may resolve, the plaintiff who brings the dispute to the court must have ‘standing.’” CHKRS, LLC v. … See Barber, 2020 WL 7122073, at *4 (“There are not sufficient factual allegations establishing that a taking of Plaintiff’s property has or likely will occur.”).

U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

563 F.3d 199 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 20, 2009

The Socorro site qualifies as an “additional site” because it was not listed as a “liquidated site” or a “debtor-owned site” under the 1996 Bankruptcy Settlement Agreement. … The EPA established past costs of $965,530.54, which, at a rate of 37% per the 1996 Bankruptcy Settlement Agreement, amounts to $357,246.

Geevarghese v. Cahill

983 F.2d 1066 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 8, 1992

Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), a plaintiff initially bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case of employment discrimination. … Both men clearly had a difference of opinion concerning staff priorities, evaluations, and Dr. Geevarghese's abilities.

Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region v. Bob Taft

444 F.3d 502 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 13, 2006

The district court’s determination will be disturbed only if it relied upon clearly erroneous findings of fact, improperly applied the governing law, or used an erroneous legal standard. Nightclubs, Inc. v. … City of Detroit, 25 F.3d 1342, 1350 (6th Cir. 1994)- (observing that an aeronautical engineer would be qualified to testify about the flight of a bumblebee based on general flight principles even if he had never actually

United States v. Cundiff

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 4, 2009

“The defendants bear the burden of establishing both that they qualify for one of the exemptions of § 1344(f)(1) and that their actions are not recaptured by § 1344(f)(2).” Greenfield Mills, Inc. v. … As the statute and regulations both require, the disputed activities “must be part of an established (i.e., on-going) farming, silviculture, or ranching operation” and they cease to be “established when the area on which

Marilyn Crossley v. Kettering Adventist Healthcare

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 30, 2024

Isaac stated that she had some concerns about Crossley coming back full-time, because Crossley had told her that she was keeping herself in isolation and her lack of immunity was “wiping her out.” … Invitation to Reapply The ADA dictates that “[n]o covered entity shall discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to . . .

Edgar v. JAC Products Inc

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 6, 2006

Employees seeking relief under the entitlement theory must therefore establish that the employer’s violation caused them harm. See Ragsdale v. … This court held that, because “Cehrs was clearly unable to return to work within the period provided by the FMLA,” the defendant was entitled to summary judgment on the FMLA claim. Id. at 785.

Schaffer v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc.

74 F.3d 722 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Feb 6, 1996

The district court found that Defendants’ products qualified as an improvement to real property, and thus the statute barred Plaintiffs’ claims. J.A. at 2165-66. … Ohio courts have clearly held that strict liability may result from a failure to warn. See Crislip v.

Topllari v. Gonzales

161 F. App'x 566 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 10, 2006

An applicant for asylum bears the burden of establishing that he qualifies as a refugee by “producing evidence that he has suffered past persecution or has a well-founded fear of future persecution.” … (No. 04-3565) -4- When an IJ determines, on the basis of an adverse credibility determination, that an applicant has failed to establish that he qualifies as a refugee, “the finding

Lonnie Dickens v. Interstate Brands Corporation

384 F. App'x 465 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 2, 2010

decision, (3) he was qualified for the position, and (4) he was either replaced by a person outside of the protected class or was treated differently than similarly situated non-protected employees. … An employee who steals tangible company property for his own personal use is clearly committing an offense of a qualitatively different nature than one who, apparently unsolicited, clocks a subordinate in and out.

Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. v. Campbell

972 F.2d 1429 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 17, 1992

[but] may conclude as a matter of law that [the challenged use] do[es] not qualify as a fair use of the copyrighted work.’ ” Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 560 , 105 S.Ct. at 2230 (quoting Pacific & S. Co. v. … Clearly, the court was using the term parody in its popular sense. While it may not be inappropriate to find that no more was taken than necessary, the copying was qualitatively substantial.