Case law

United States v. Simpson

116 F. App'x 736 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 15, 2004

Ajan claims that his prior conviction for simple robbery in Louisiana does not qualify as a crime of violence under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. … Having failed to prove the district court committed clear error in refusing to grant him a two-level downward departure as a minor participant, he even more clearly failed to prove he qualified as a minimal participant

Exel, Inc. v. S. Refrigerated Transp., Inc.

905 F.3d 455 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Sep 25, 2018

Based on this evidence, and because no evidence suggests that the rate paid by Exel varied with the shipment’s value, the district court’s finding that the parties had negotiated a flat rate is not clearly erroneous. … claims any reliance on Exel’s representation in “a ‘Truckload Pricing Request’ . . . that the value of the Sandoz cargo transported by SRT would be ‘typically $1 Million or less,’” we note that typically is an important qualifier

Jack Amariglio-Dunn v. John McCoy

12 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 6, 1993

The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff was not qualified for the position and that, even if he were qualified, they possessed a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for not hiring him. … The plaintiff simply did not show sufficient corporate travel experience to qualify.

Andrews v. Columbia Gas

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 10, 2008

easement implies the right to maintain it in accordance with federal regulations), the rights granted in an easement ultimately 8 Plaintiffs make a passing reference to the argument that Seibert was not qualified … Here, plaintiffs allege that Columbia Gas failed to protest the trees; this is tantamount to alleging mere silence and is therefore insufficient to establish waiver under Ohio law.13 2.

Wayne L. Patrick v. United States of America Joseph Owczarek Brenda J. Leonard

99 F.3d 1139 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 15, 1996

99 F.3d 1139 78 A.F.T.R.2d 96 -7076 NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service … The United States has waived sovereign immunity to certain tort claims under the FTCA.

Rouster Ex Rel. Estate of Rouster v. County of Saginaw

749 F.3d 437 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Apr 9, 2014

Clearly then, Jerry had an objectively serious need for medical treatment. See Blackmore, 390 F.3d at 897. … But she clearly took appropriate steps to protect Jerry.

Tracy Jones v. Sandusky County, Ohio

652 F. App'x 348 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jun 15, 2016

After defendants’ interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity was denied, Jones v. Sandusky County, 541 F. … The denial of a Rule 59(a) motion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, which occurs when a district court “relies on clearly erroneous findings of fact, improperly applies the law, or uses an erroneous legal standard

Clarence D. Casey v. Fisher Body Division, General Motors Corporation

787 F.2d 588 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 12, 1986

The district court further agreed with GM's contention that in all three instances GM promoted the 'highest qualified individual.' … We conclude that the district court's non-discrimination finding was not clearly erroneous.

Susan E. Daughenbaugh, Cross-Appellee v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., Great Lakes Steamship Div., Cross-Appellant

891 F.2d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 14, 1989

Gary Gnacinski (“Gnacinski”), an M/V Foy Oiler and Qualified Man in the Engine Department, as well as Gintz and Chirkun, all testified that if a seaman became intoxicated while on shore leave, the officers and crew looked … Additionally, Atlass is clearly distinguishable from the case at bar.

Beerbower v. United States

787 F.2d 588 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 14, 1986

Sec. 7421 (a), barred injunctive relief, the other claims were without merit, and the government defendants were immune from suit. … The notice of appeal was filed on December 26, 1984, clearly beyond the sixty days provided by Rule 4.

United States v. Daniel Gissantaner

990 F.3d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 5, 2021

While the software does not eliminate the ever-present risks of human error, it “clearly represent[s] a major improvement over purely subjective interpretation.” R.41-17 at 93. … If highly consequential evidence emerges from what looks like an indecipherable computer program to most non-scientists, non-statisticians, and non-programmers, it is imperative that qualified individuals explain how the

Robert Thompson v. Dale Foltz

907 F.2d 151 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 6, 1990

907 F.2d 151 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 … Nevertheless, Bush says he did not review the court file which clearly indicated to Bush that the proceeding in question had been held. 18 Id.

Shreve Equipment, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Clay Equipment Corporation, Cross-Appellee

650 F.2d 101 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 18, 1981

For the four year period from 1971 through 1974 Shreve was qualified to receive a volume discount on the basis of its sales volume. 3 Based on the testimony of Shreve’s economist, the district court found that the denial … The evidence linking the violation to the injury sustained must be more precise than that needed to establish the amount of damages. Van Dyk Research Corp., supra.

Suster v. Marshall

149 F.3d 523 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jul 30, 1998

Plaintiffs-Appellees, Suster and Clearly, cross-appeal the district court's denial of preliminary injunction to enjoin enforcement of Canon VII(C)(8) of the Ohio Judicial Code of Conduct. … The district court determined, however, that Plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed in establishing on the merits that Canon (VII)(C)(8) was unconstitutional.

Monistere v. Memphis Police Dept

115 F. App'x 845 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 17, 2004

custom, or usage, of any State...subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … In sum, the record clearly supports the conclusion that Embrey’s decision was (1) final, (2) not reviewable, and (3) unconstrained by the existing policies and practices of his supervisory officers.

William Ochadleus v. City of Detroit

838 F.3d 792 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 3, 2016

It did not require, at conception, any codified definitions or terms; it did, however, require, as a qualifying element, a conceptual means “to determine the extent to which the plan ha[d] progressed,” In re United Producers … Because this concern about public services and political process does not arise in every Chapter 9 bankruptcy case—as it clearly does not arise in the present case—it is not a valid reason to conclude that equitable mootness

April Miller v. Kim Davis

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Aug 23, 2019

In response to Davis’s lawsuit, Governor Matthew Bevin, who had succeeded Beshear, issued an executive order establishing a revised marriage license that didn’t contain the names of county clerks. … Scott, 786 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2015)—a test we ordinarily use to determine whether a defendant is a state or local official for purposes of sovereign immunity. Id. at 429.

Modla v. United States

779 F.2d 51 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Oct 9, 1985

779 F.2d 51 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 … As a suit seeking relief from the United States and its agencies, the doctrine of sovereign immunity clearly barred the suit to the extent immunity is not expressly waived under the Federal Tort Claims Act, supra.

Montez Morton v. Greater Cleveland Reg'l Transit Auth.

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

The only exception to termination following an employee’s use of overt force against a member of the public is “where it is clearly established that the employee acted in self-defense.” (Id.). … Morton, however, was not allowed to use force under GCRTA’s policy unless “it [was] clearly established that [he] acted in self-defense.” (R. 18-1, PageID 289) (emphasis added).

Cynthia Bimberg v. Elkton-Pigeon-Bay Port Laker Schools

512 F. App'x 462 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Jan 17, 2013

Bimberg could meet three of those requirements: (1) proof that she was qualified for the position of bus driver, (2) an adverse employment action by the employer, and (3) her association, known to the employer, with a … The school district’s failure to do so clearly did not constitute a violation of the ADA, and the district court did not err in holding that Laker -5- No. 12-1311 Bimberg v.